A Guide to Community Engagement for Public-Private ......the community affected by a PPP. The guide...

A Guide to Community Engagement for Public-Private PartnershipsDRAFT FOR DISCUSSION

Please send your feedback to Adriana Eftimie at [email protected] Craig Sugden at [email protected]

A Guide to Community Engagement for Public-Private PartnershipsDRAFT FOR DISCUSSION

June 2019

CONTENTS

SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1.0 THE GUIDE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

2.0 WHY THE GUIDE? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

3.0 HOW ARE COMMUNITIES AFFECTED BY PPPs? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

4.0 WHY ENGAGEMENT MATTERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

5.0 PRINCIPLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

6.0 THE SIX STEPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

7.0 ENGAGEMENT TOOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

8.0 ENGAGEMENT BY PHASE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

9.0 FINAL THOUGHTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

APPENDIX 1 SAMPLE CHECKLISTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

APPENDIX 2 ASSESSING INTEREST AND INFLUENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

APPENDIX 3 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60

APPENDIX 4 SAMPLE COMMUNITY COMPLAINTS MANAGEMENT MECHANISM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

APPENDIX 5 THE SIX STEPS BY PHASE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .80

REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92

ABBREVIATIONS

CA contracting authority

ESIA environmental and social impact assessment

KPI KPI

NGO Non-government organization

PPP public private partnership

VfM value for money

PPP Community Engagement Guide | Draft for Discussion 3

SETTING THE SCENE

The guide responds to calls for better stakeholder communication and engagement in Public-Private Partnership (PPPs).1 It explains how communities affected by a PPP can engage in the project. The aim is to improve the development outcomes from PPPs and simultaneously creating a smoother operating environment for all parties, including the government and the private sector. Better outcomes will be achieved by mobilizing the community to enhance positive impacts while avoiding or at least minimizing potential negative impacts.

The guide provides practical, systematic advice, usable by those either new to PPPs or community engagement, as well as those with more experience. It covers the full project cycle, all aspects of a PPP that can affect a community, and all members of the community affected by a PPP. The guide covers the role in engagement of both the government’s contracting authority (CA)—i.e. the public partner—and the private partner procured to deliver a PPP.

The guide encourages special attention to the needs of vulnerable groups, such as the elderly, female-headed households, children, those with disabilities. Vulnerable groups are often disempowered and lack influence. Bringing them into community engagement can help reverse key manifestations of their vulnerability.

This guide emphasizes the importance of two-way community engagement. It is equally important to listen to and consider community input to a PPP as it is to share information and inform communities about the project.

Using the guide will strengthen the business case of viable PPPs. In some cases, community engagement may find a proposed PPP should not continue. Findings from the community engagement described in this guide should be incorporated into the project’s feasibility study or business case. This is one way communities can both inform a PPP as well as be informed about a PPP.

Countries will be able to take this global guide and adapt it to their own circumstances, creating their own purpose-built guide to community engagement in PPPs. Tanzania has already done so and is using better community engagement to strengthen its PPP program.

The Benefits of Community Engagement

When CAs and the private partner adequately resource community engagement, they will give communities voice in a project. This will help:

• deliver services valued by the community;

• keep tariffs and other user charges to an affordable and fair level;

The guide explains how communities can engage in PPPs

For PPPs to succeed, all parties must be vested, including end users and any inconvenienced citizens

and the vulnerable

Engagement is a two-way process

Findings should feed into the business case for a PPP

The guide can beadapted to countrycircumstances

Good community engagement strengthens a PPP by giving communities voice and making operations more predictable

SUMMARY

1 Such as set out in the World Bank’s PPP Reference Guide (https://pppknowledgelab.org/guide/sections/39-stakeholder-communication-and-engagement).


• involve communities in solutions to any problems that emerge;

• attain and sustain support from communities,

• manage expectations so they are realistic and achievable,

• manage risks and mitigate the potential for disagreements; and

• reduce the prospect of delay and disruption.

PPPs built on good community engagement are likely to be:

• more responsive to users;

• more sustainable;

• more resilient to change;

• more efficient and

• more likely to attract good private partners and affordable financing.

Principles

The guide is based on commonsense, widely accepted principals (Figure 1). Sticking to these principles provides the best way of maximizing the benefits of community engagement.

FIGURE 1 Principles of Community Engagement in PPPs

Identify the communities

carefully

Start engagement

early

Customize the engagement

Encourage transparency

and trust

Ensure Clarity

Pursue the best method of

engagement

Be accountable and monitor

Principals


The Six Steps

The guide sets out six steps in applying these principles. The exact nature of community engagement will depend on the PPP being considered and an array of social and environmental factors. The six steps of the guide provide a starting point that countries can modify to fit with their existing processes and requirements.

Step 1: Define the Purpose of Engagement

The CA needs to be clear about the purpose of engagement and the key issues to address, as this will set the context for community interactions and managing expectations of those participating in the process. To define the purpose, the CA must first agree on what can be accomplished with the engagement.

Step 2: Decide which Community Citizens and Groups to Engage

The CA needs to create a list of who to engage, with all the community citizens, groups and organizations that could have an interest in the PPP or have some influence over the success of the PPP. The list is a living-document and will developed by the CA over time. It is important to put a solid effort into creating the initial list.

Step 3: Conduct a Community Engagement Mapping

To complete a community engagement mapping, the CA and private partner will need to consider both the interest and influence different community groups, citizens and organizations may have in the project.

Step 4: Select Methods for Implementing the Engagement Plan

Different methods can be used by the CA and the private partner to engage communities. They should develop a project specific community engagement plan that describes proposed engagement strategies, tools, responsibilities and schedule for engagement. The plan should evolve over the different phases of a PPP.

Step 5: Issues Tracking and Complaints Management

An issue tracking table should be created to document ideas, concerns or questions about the PPP. The CA and private partner need a systematic way of managing and responding to complaints and grievances.

Step 6: Reporting and Monitoring

Accurately recording community feedback, sharing it transparently within government and with the community is a critical step in building trust and

support among the community.

There are six steps to effective community engagement for PPPs

BOX 1 The Six Steps

Define purpose of

engagement

Decide whom to engage

Conduct community

mapping

Reporting and monitoring

Issues tracking and grievance

process

Select method of engagement and implement


The mapping of influence and interest (Step 3) of list prepared of relevant citizens, groups and organizations (Step 2) is one of the features of the guide. Resources for community engagement are scarce and need to be well targeted. Mapping of community citizens, groups and organizations does not mean that the lower priority ones are ignored or forgotten, but instead that each is given an appropriate amount of attention by the CA and the private partner.

The CA and the private partner will need to track issues, questions and concerns raised by the community in an organized and consistent way (Step 5). They must document the community engagement work they complete.

A grievance and complaints management mechanism will need to be established early in the PPP project cycle (also part of Step 5). The guide provides advice on how to structure this with an emphasis on building on existing complaints management processes.

By tracking issues, questions and concerns raised by the community and responding to grievances, the CA and private partner will be able to monitor their progress in ensuring effective engagement, determine if the methods and tools they have selected are effective (or not), and identify where more effort and resources will need to be allocated to keep the project moving forward (Step 6). This effort also serves as a way to identify risks before they become larger problems and develop responses before delays to construction or operations occur.

FIGURE 2 Sample Mapping Matrix

Mapping interest and influence help target the use of scarce resources

Tracking of community feedback is essential

As is having a grievance mechanism

and reporting andmonitoring

INTEREST

Lower Higher

Low

erH

igh

er

INF

LUE

NC

E


Poor documentation of community engagement is one of the biggest weakness of most community engagement processes. Without documentation, much of the good work done by a CA and private partner fails to receive the recognition it deserves. One result is the good work done doesn’t help attract private partners or meet the requirements of lenders. Good documentation of engagement efforts also helps maintain consistency in engagement for the CA as PPPs can take many years to complete and there can be turnover in CA staff during this period. Having good documentation allows CA staff to understand what engagement has occurred and be consistent moving forward.

Engagement Through the Project Cycle

Engagement is best started when the potential PPP project is first identified by the CA. The steps in the guide should continue to be used throughout the PPP project cycle.

Community engagement should deepen as the project proceeds through the project cycle. The engagement should broaden to include the private partner to the PPP once they are procured.

As the PPP Project advances, the level of effort needed to complete the six steps will increase. For example:

• during the identification phase of the PPP project cycle, community engagement may rely more on the knowledge of CA staff to identify key community members and groups;

• as the PPP moves into the preparation and procurement phases, more intensive engagement will be required. A broader set of engagement methods will be employed. The community will not be involved in procurement, but needs to be well informed about it; and

• the private partner will begin to share responsibilities for community engagement during the implementation phase. This guide suggests that the private partner take on much of the day-to- day responsibility for engagement with the CA to maintain an over-arching, monitoring role. The requirements on the private partner will be set out in the PPP agreement based on a community engagement plan previously prepared by the CA with the community.

A broad estimate of the level required over the different phases of project cycle is illustrated in Figure 3. The actual effort required will vary by project and by country.

The guide is to be used over the full project cycle

Over project life, deepen and broaden community engagement

The private partner will become involved duringimplementation of the PPP


FIGURE 3 The Six Steps and Estimated Level of Effort Across the Project Cycle


INTRODUCTION

The guide explains how communities affected by a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) can engage in the project.

In this guide, ‘community’ is a broad term that refers to groups of people living in the same location, having shared interests or otherwise holding similar identity or characteristics. It encompasses vulnerable groups and indigenous persons. Examples of community members include households, workers, trade unions, businesses, community leaders, and members of interest or citizen groups.

The aim is to improve a project’s development outcomes by enhancing positive impacts while avoiding or at least minimizing potential negative impacts. Community engagement rests on relationships and dialogue, and includes information sharing, listening, and decision-making, among many activities.

The guide provides practical, systematic advice usable by those new to PPPs or community engagement, as well as those with more experience. It covers the full project cycle and the role of engagement of both the government’s contracting authority (CA)—i.e. the public partner—and the private partner procured to deliver a PPP. Special attention is paid to engagement with vulnerable members of the community.

The guide shows how to establish a two-way process of community engagement. Under this guide, it is just as important to listen to and consider community input to a PPP as it is to share information and inform communities about the project. Effective engagement requires that those preparing and implementing a PPP both address concerns raised by communities and provide feedback to communities on how their concerns were addressed.

Using the guide will strengthen the business case of viable PPPs. In some cases, community engagement may find a proposed PPP should not continue. Findings from community engagement should be incorporated into the design of the PPP presented in the project’s feasibility study or business case. This is one way communities can both inform a PPP as well as be informed about a PPP.

USING THE GUIDE

Engagement is best started when the PPP is first identified by CA, and continue throughout the preparation, procurement then implementation of the PPP. If community engagement only commences part-way through the project cycle, CAs should catch-up on the engagement steps that were missed before moving to the next phase of the project cycle.

Community engagement should deepen as the project proceeds through the project cycle. Community engagement should also broaden to include the private partner to the PPP once they are procured. The guide explains how to both deepen and broaden community engagement.



It sets out a two-way process for understandingand responding to community concerns

Findings should feed into the business case for a PPP

The guide is to be used over the full project cycle

To progressively deepen and broaden community engagement

1.0 THE GUIDE


Responsibility for initiating community engagement rests with government. A process that follows this guide can assist the CA, the PPP unit and other government agencies involved in a PPP as they identify the steps to be taken to ensure community participation.2 The findings of engagement should be fed back to communities and be incorporated into the studies undertaken as a PPP is prepared.

External advisors are normally engaged to help governments prepare a PPP and then procure a private partner. While government has direct responsibility for managing the communities’ engagement, PPP advisors also have an important role to play in advocating for communities to be engaged in PPPs. PPP advisors can also use these community engagement guidelines in undertaking their work during project preparation and in supporting the CA with technical information and expertise when it engages with communities. The terms of reference to PPP advisors should aim to be explicit in what is required by setting out their roles and responsibilities. In some cases, PPP advisors may need to be pro-active in reinforcing the importance of good community engagement.

Communities can in turn look to the guide to understand what to expect. If communities feel they are not adequately involved in a PPP, they can use the guide as a benchmark when asking the government for more involvement.

Some of the specific responsibilities agreed through the community engagement will probably be allocated to the private partner through the PPP agreement. An example of such a specific responsibility includes providing services to users with poor mobility. The PPP agreement will also set out the general obligations of the private partner for community engagement, such as for reporting on implementation of a community engagement plan. The community engagement plan needs to be robust and precise enough to allow establishment of such formal obligations. Obligations need to be clear to both the private partner and the banks they borrow from so all understand the scope of the PPP they are committing to.

This guide is a practical tool relevant across most PPPs and most countries. Its application may need tailoring to local circumstances and the PPP being considered. The country specific engagement process put in place needs to fit with the obligation of any PPP law or regulations and other relevant legislation, as well as any obligations to external partners such as the development finance institutions. The guide provides a starting point that can be refined or adjusted on a country by country basis to develop a country specific engagement process.

It is important to keep in mind that community engagement is part of the overall stakeholder engagement process of a PPP. It needs to link to this broader process, so the PPP is prepared in a wholistic manner.

Country specif ic engagement guidelines can be developed based on this global document

Users include government, communities themselves, PPP advisors, private partners and the f inance sector

2 For convenience the guide focuses on the CA as the public partner to the PPP. The guide is equally applicable to PPP units and other government agencies when explaining how they should work with communities on a PPP, and what they expect from a CA. It also helps identify what should be asked of the private proponent to an unsolicited proposal, should unsolicited proposals be allowed. Exactly what should be asked of the private proponent will depend on the stage in the project cycle that unsolicited proposals enter and the responsibilities for project preparation allocated to a private proponent by the government.


WHAT THE GUIDE IS NOT!

The guide positions community engagement as part of the broader stakeholder engagement process undertaken to ensure a PPP delivers value-for-money (VfM).3 That broader process also includes other activities that community engagement may indirectly feed into or learn from but are nonetheless separate. These other separate activities include:

• formal compliance with environmental and social legislation and the safeguard requirements of lenders;

• dialogue with regulators on their requirements and compliance;

• land acquisition;

• media engagement by the PPP;

• market testing of proposed PPPs;

• procurement processes, including bid conferences;

• formal performance reviews under the PPP agreement; and

• dispute resolution processes under the PPP agreement.

FEATURES OF THE GUIDE

This guide addresses the challenge of community engagement for PPPs by outlining a standardized approach to community engagement. Six steps to engaging the community are explained. Following the six-steps will provide efficiency and consistency in the community engagement process across the diverse projects that make up a PPP program.

The approach recommended in this guide can provide the basis of country specific guidelines. This global guide is designed to generally be complement and compatible with national and international safeguards requirements, such as set out in national legislation and the World Bank’s 2016 Environmental and Social Framework and the International Finance Corporation’s 2012 Performance Standards. The guide does not in any way modify or supersede these documents. The guide is a practical tool that describes an engagement process that will help CAs, PPP units, government agencies, communities, PPP advisors, the private and finance sectors work together on PPPs.

The next sections explore how communities are affected by PPPs and why engagement matters. Principles of community engagement are then set out, followed by a description of the six steps of community engagement. Engagement tools and how engagement varies over the phases of the project cycle are then discussed. The guide concludes with some final thoughts on its use.

Annexes provide sample checklists, tips on assessing interest and influence, an outline of community engagement methods, sample community complaints management mechanism and further discussion of the six steps, by phase of the project cycle.

The guide sets out six-steps to communityengagement

To help all PPPstakeholders worktogether

3 For discussion of the broader stakeholder engagement process for PPPs, see the World Bank PPP Reference Guide (https://pppknowledgelab.org/guide/sections/39-stakeholder-communication-and-engagement).


The guide responds to the call for better stakeholder communication and engagement in PPPs. As set out in the World Bank’s PPP Reference Guide: “Stakeholder engagement is an inexpensive and efficient way of creating a better operational environment for a project. The consultation process reduces risks and increases its chance of success.”4

The benefits of community engagement have been evident since at least the 1980s. For example, a cross-sector study of 68 World Bank projects from that period indicated that projects there were well aligned with local (sociocultural) conditions in the community had rates of economic returns that were more than twice as high as projects that did not analyze the local community conditions well (Kottak 1991). Various streams of evidence, including case studies from the Independent Evaluation Group of the World Bank Group, show that rigorous participatory methodologies that are embedded in durable institutional systems and bring resolution to citizens’ feedback can improve trust in public services (Menocal and Sharma 2008; World Bank Group 2016; World Bank Group 2018). A 2017 study of 200 conflict-affected infrastructure projects in Latin America and the Caribbean highlighted the potential for inadequate engagement with communities to drive conflict (Box 2.1).

Community engagement is now seen as a good practice input to public investments, as well as for private investment. Acknowledgement is demonstrated by the adoption of community engagement frameworks, handbooks and guidelines across the multilateral development banks.5

The engagement process described in the guide will help CAs achieve the benefits of community engagement for their PPPs. Doing so will require CAs to invest time and resources early in the PPP process and to maintain that investment as the PPP continues. Although this investment may be challenging for CAs to fund, it is essential and will generate long-lived benefits.

Early engagement will help ensure the timely preparation of PPPs, help avoid delays and extra costs during construction and implementation while maximizing the benefits for the communities served by a PPP. Building relationships with communities for PPPs is a key sustainability strategy.

Most CAs will have a record of some form of community engagement in for conventional, budget-financed development projects. Such approaches are naturally carried through to their PPPs.

2.0 WHY THE GUIDE?

4 World Bank PPP Reference Guide (https://pppknowledgelab.org/guide/sections/39-stakeholder-communication-and-engagement).5 See for example African Development Bank (2001), Asian Development Bank (2012), European Commission (2015), International

Finance Corporation (2007a.b. 2012), World Bank (2014, 2016).


A 2017 study of 200 conflict-affected infrastructure projects in Latin America and the Caribbean found

that deficient planning, reduced access to resources, lack of community benefits, and lack of adequate consultation were the most prominent conflict drivers. In many cases, conflicts escalated because grievances and community concerns accumulated, going unresolved for many years.

Social drivers of conflict were found to be diverse:

• Lack of community benefits led to conflicts in 84% of cases. Communities were concerned that they would have to endure the project’s negative impacts without receiving adequate benefits as compensation;

• Reduced access to resources led to conflicts in 78% of cases;

• Impacts on the traditional value system of local people (70% of cases) and lack of local jobs (47% of cases) are prominent, often interrelated conflict drivers. Many communities regard infrastructure as an opportunity for economic development and demand a sizable portion of project-related jobs to be allocated to them. However, some other communities oppose large infrastructures and are afraid that such projects would alter their way of life and degrade their traditions;

• 61% of interviewees reported that external groups with hidden political or economic interests can disrupt the process of coming to an agreement. In general, frustrating communities during the earliest phases can have a significant effect on whether they would accept the project over the long term;

• Forced relocation of people led to conflicts in 33% of cases. Technology issues led to conflicts in 18% of cases. Abuse of labor rights led to conflicts in 15% of cases. Last but not least, crime (11%) and prostitution (4%) are among the social conflict drivers.

Concurrent governance drivers of conflict were also identified:

• Deficient planning aggravated conflicts in 86% of cases in the database, and was reported by 74% of the

interviewees as a conflict driver;

• Lack of adequate consultation (or just absence of consultation) led to conflicts in 74% of cases. This was a particularly significant conflict driver for populations which did not have the right to a formal consultation, or have acquired such right only very recently;

• Lack of transparency in project-related information and the decision-making process led to conflicts in 68% of cases;

• 55% of the interviewees also reported unrealistic expectations as a common conflict driver; and

• Corruption led to conflicts in 34% of cases.

Source: Inter-American Development Bank (2017)

BOX 2.1 Conflict-affected infrastructure projects in Latin America and the Caribbean


But the PPP typically raises extra demands that require additional effort. There are also important differences in the outcomes sought from community engagement on PPPs, and when these outputs are needed. Notably:

• The goal of a PPP is to deliver public services or infrastructure. The design of the PPP and its agreement must be orientated towards achievement of this goal if the PPP is to deliver value-for-money (VfM). The goal can only be achieved when the needs of users—which commonly includes the community—are understood. The PPP agreement is output-based. Services to be delivered, the required performance standards, and the charges for services need to be expressed clearly in a PPP agreement. Communities need to be involved in defining the services, establishing key performance indicators, setting charges etc. In some cases, communities may need to be engaged by bidders as they finalise their bids (e.g. to prepare designs that can deliver the required services).

The conventional budget-financed project is input-oriented and lacks such a heavy emphasis on services. The conventional budget-financed project will have to establish the economic and social case for the project, but typically does not delve as deeply into community needs;

• The government enters into a long-term agreement for a PPP covering the operation phase. The operation phase needs to be fully set out during preparation so that requirements are clear in the PPP agreement. When a community is affected by a PPP, its needs throughout the operation phase must be understood so a response is set out in the PPP agreement. The community should be involved in this process via good community engagement.

A conventional budget-financed project will often only finalise implementation arrangements during the operation phase. Under a PPP, this approach of establishing arrangements for the community after during operations is too late;

The guide responds to the extra and different demands posed by PPPs


• For a PPP, community engagement is more effective when it starts early in the project cycle. Early engagement raises the prospect the PPP will be designed well and succeed. For a PPP, community engagement should be integral to the project preparation process, feeding into the preparation of the business case or prefeasibility and feasibility studies. Because PPPs can be costly to prepare, and project preparation funds are scarce, it is important they are prepared well from the start.

In contrast, the community engagement for conventional budget-financed projects may concentrate on meeting the requirements of environmental and social legislation. Such an emphasis may see stakeholder engagement become compliance-oriented and separated from project preparation (although it should not be).

• The PPP transfers risk to the private partner. The market will systematically assess and value this risk when considering an involvement in a PPP. The private partner and their lenders will need to understand the project risks they bear so they can price and manage it. Effective community engagement reduces project risk because it helps identify and mitigate construction and operational risks. This makes a project more attractive to the private partner and lenders. The records of good community engagement can be used to reassure the market that the project has been prepared well and will succeed.

In contrast, much of the construction risk and most operational risk rests with the budget under a typical, conventional budget-financed project. Government’s typically do not assess and value such risks posed by the budget to their public investments. As such, the imperative to undertake comprehensive community engagement is lower;

• The private partner will take on some responsibility for community engagement during implementation phase of a PPP. The private partners engagement efforts should build on the community engagement completed in the initial phases of the PPP process. The requirements for the private partners community engagement work should be clearly described in PPP agreement and other guidance.

The private sector has a much more limited role under a conventional budget-financed project. The private sector’s main involvement for such projects is as a contractor for the construction of facilities;

• Community opposition is a well-known risk factor to PPPs that the market examines closely. There are unfortunately many examples of disruptions to PPPs because community needs were not addressed adequately. Private partners and their lenders prefer PPPs that can demonstrate effective community engagement. Well-prepared PPPs are welcomed by the market as they carry lower risk of community opposition; and


• CAs often do not document community engagement activities adequately. If this practice extends to PPPs, it can make it more difficult for PPP units and other relevant government agencies, as well potential private partners and their sources of finance to determine if engagement was done adequately. PPPs that will otherwise be workable can be made un-bankable by poor documentation of engagement. It is important that extra attention is paid to documentation when preparing a PPP, compared to the conventional budget financed project.

Because of the extra demands and differences arising from PPPs, a PPP-specific guide to community engagement is needed. Such a guide can strengthen PPPs by ensuring that the needs and views of community are systematically and continuously understood from early in the project’s life through to the end of its operational life. Such a guide can help ensure that the response is prepared in an effective and efficient manner. It can save time and money over the life of the project by avoiding community obstruction of projects.


A PPP delivers public services. These services can bring positive impacts, such as improved quality of water, better waste management or enhanced public transportation. Improving livelihoods is after all what motivates governments to undertake a PPP! Many PPPs deliver these services directly to communities. For example, local communities are normally the users of water and sanitation PPPs. When a community is the user of the service, the PPP needs to focus on meeting their needs.

PPPs can also bring negative impacts. They can be localised or be felt over a wider range. A project should strive to avoid these or to mitigate those that are unavoidable.

Some of the more common negative impacts can be felt acutely by the project’s neighbours. For example, gaining access to a site, constructing facilities, and then operating these facilities can impact the daily lives of nearby communities. In cases where the PPP site has been purchased from community members, formal and informal tenants may need to be resettled, some community members may have their livelihoods disrupted, while others may potentially be affected by noise, congestion and air emissions caused by the new facility.

PPPs must be paid for, and payments bring with them a range of other potential impacts on communities. User pay PPPs that levy fees, tolls, tariffs or other charges on the community have a further direct impact on communities. The level and structure of charges can be major factors in determining the impact of a PPP on the community. How charges vary between users and what lower income and vulnerable members of the community pay can be especially important.

Communities are often a key user of a PPP

Communities also live with PPPs

And pay for the PPP, either directly or indirectly

3.0 HOW ARE COMMUNITIES AFFECTED BY PPPs?


Some PPPs are government pays PPP, where the government pays the private partner on behalf of users. Communities will ultimately fund the government-pays PPP through the user charges levied by the government (separately to the PPP) or through taxation. Such payments affect communities.

PPPs don’t always deliver services to local communities. For example, port PPPs target business users, airport PPPs will serve foreign travellers and large power generation projects sell into an electricity grid without knowing its customers. Such PPPs are typically prominent in the early stages of a PPP program, mainly because they are large with good flows of user revenue that can secure investors. For such PPPs, good community engagement can help the PPP determine the impact on communities that live nearby the project, or they can help determine more general impacts, for example, communities will be more generally affected by a power PPP that allows new areas to be connected to the grid or requires an increase in electricity tariffs to pay for it.

A sample of concerns that may be held by communities are at Box 3.1.

Every PPP affects the community somehow

• Concerns about construction, and how it disrupts daily activities for citizens (for example related dust, noise, traffic patterns, utility services etc.).

• Concerns about employment and contracting. There will be expectations for jobs from the local community or, in the case of an existing service, fears about losing employment or being transferred from the public to private sector.

• Concerns about in-migration, as people come to the project area in search of work. This can place additional demand on local services and infrastructure and create issues with the local population.

• Concerns about the social impact of migration/temporary workers, particularly of the potential for gender-based violence.

• Concerns about relocation or resettlement impacts on households and on small businesses.

• Concerned the project will not be designed with community input, and therefore will not meet the needs of the community that will use the PPP.

• Concerned the construction or operation of a PPP project will affect their ability to access local services or infrastructure. A new road may have a toll charge that local residents can’t afford to pay.

• Concerns about the environmental impact of the PPP.

• Concerns in user charges, or the taxes required to pay for a PPP.

• Concerns in changes in the availability or nature of public services. Some services may be discontinued to make way for the PPP.

• Concerned to understand how the project will be gender friendly, responsive to climate change and pro-poor

• Concerns about cultural heritage that the project may affect or would incorporate.

BOX 3.1 A Sample of Concerns Communities May Have


THE PERSPECTIVE OF GOVERNMENT

Greater community input from the start improves project design and expected performance. It ensures that designs accurately reflect community priorities and needs. To achieve this, the CA needs to work to ensure community engagement is effective, while the private partner and their source of finance will check to ensure community engagement was done well before making an investment decision.

Engagement processes provide a means to continuously verify the relevance and appropriateness of the project being prepared and to adjust the design as needed. Community engagement is essential to achieving the goal of the PPP of delivering public services in a manner that delivers VfM.

Ensuring good community engagement is thus in the interests of government. The likelihood of successfully developing a PPP typically increases with the level of support the community has for the PPP.

Community engagement generates benefits for other reasons. Different sectors of the community have different capacities to participate in public projects like PPPs. Community engagement programs can adjust outreach programs to accommodate different subgroups in the community and equalize opportunities for input. Community engagement, when done well, can make sure sectors of the community that do not normally have much input or influence on projects are engaged and can contribute – such as Youth, Women, Elders, Disabled or very sick people. Community engagement can thus ensure fair outcomes across the community.

Engagement can also help build local capacity, including the capacity of CAs to analyse problems and initiate other public projects.

THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE PRIVATE PARTNER

Looking at a PPP from the perspective of its private partner also highlights why community engagement matters. The private partner must generate a reasonable return for investors and be able to service any loans required to finance the project. The objective of a PPP is the provision of a public service, but a PPP must also constitute a sustainable business opportunity.

When considering engaging in a PPP and preparing its bid, the private partner is looking for reassurance that the PPP can succeed as a business. The private partner is looking for a reliable source of demand for their services, someone to pay for these services at the cost of delivering them, and reliable access to the sites they use. To the private partner, the community clearly matters when it is the user of the services delivered, the one that pays for the services, the neighbor, the source of the land being used, or the provider of the work force. The community can also be important through its role in the political process, whether that be at the national or local level.

Good community engagement adjusts PPP designs to meet community needs and achieve VfM

Good community engagement makes a PPP more inclusive

Communities matter to the private partner!!

4.0 WHY ENGAGEMENT MATTERS


When a PPP delivers services directly to the community, knowing the level of demand from the community and how they want services delivered are essential ingredients of a successful PPP. When communities pay for services, establishing their willingness and ability to pay is another essential ingredient. To the private partner, community engagement can clarify if these ingredients exist.

Community engagement is best viewed as a mutually beneficial process that ensures communities are provided the services they demand at a reasonable charge, while reassuring private partners they have someone to sell to.

Communities can also be pivotal to the success of a PPP because of their role in providing site access. In some situations, nearby communities may be important if they are frustrated or jealous that another community will be home to a certain service or infrastructure.

The political acceptability of a PPP is almost always a key consideration in preparing and implementing a PPP. For example, when a PPP results in high user charges, the PPPs that have effectively engage with the users and built up community supported for the PPP are more likely to succeed than those that fail to secure community support.

These various linkages between a PPP and the community give rise to communities as a source of project risk. Risk associated with objections or opposition from groups and members in a community are issues that private partners and financiers will carefully consider, along with the other sources of project risks.

Engagement processes provide an opportunity to foresee and resolve potential obstacles before key project decisions are made. CAs can for example mitigate risk by disseminating project information, learn about potential community issues, and establishing a dialogue with the community. Community engagement has the potential to prevents delays and avoid unforeseen costs in the implementation phase. Good engagement can help provide nearby communities a voice in the process. This can be especially true for projects on the urban fringe, where local rural communities may not be directly engaged in the project but are nonetheless important to the project.

Community engagement helps clarify if a PPP will succeed

It benefits both communities and the future private partner

Communities are important to site access

And the political process

Community engagement helps mitigate risk


The community and CA, and ultimately the private partner, learn from each other by exchanging information and experiences. Engagement helps them share a better understanding of the goal of the PPP and the issues surrounding them. This process broadens the partnership and make project success more likely.

THE PERSPECTIVE OF INVESTORS AND LENDERS

Investors and lender will look at a PPP in much the same way as the private partner. Investors and lenders need to be assured that a PPP will succeed, and effective community engagement is recognized as a key input to the preparation of a PPP and ensuring community support. Moreover, stakeholder engagement is one of the ten Equator Principles and thorough consultation is a requisite to receive funds from Equator Principle Financial Institutions.6

THE CONSEQUENCES OF POOR ENGAGEMENT

Poor community engagement can unfortunately manifest in many ways. The absence of community ownership and support of the PPP has for example led to:

• the low up-take of project services;

• reduced sustainability of benefits;

• poor maintenance of the PPP and;

• limited cost recovery of projects.

• Lack of participation can also lead to:

• a sense of indifference in the community towards the PPP;

• resentment towards the PPP;

• deliberate obstruction on the part of intended community beneficiaries; and

• complications that create cost overruns and schedule delays.7

Disregarding community considerations, and not building engagement and consensus for a project, has led to many PPPs being abandoned or failing to achieve expected results (World Bank 2017). Experience has shown that community opposition has the potential to derail projects, even technically sound PPPs can fail without a full understanding of community (socio-political) dynamics and the value of communication in their design and implementation (Calabrese 2008). The case of an urban water expansion PPP in Cochabamba, Bolivia illustrates the importance of community engagement (Box 4.1).

The f inance sector recognizes the importance of community engagement

Poor community engagement manifests in different ways

6 The Equator Principles (EPs) is a risk management framework, adopted by financial institutions, for determining, assessing and managing environmental and social risk in projects and is primarily intended to provide a minimum standard for due diligence and monitoring to support responsible risk decision-making. Currently 96 Equator Principles Financial Institutions (EPFIs) in 37 countries have officially adopted the EPs, covering the majority of international project finance debt within developed and emerging markets (https://equator-principles.com/)

7 Based on the African Development Bank (2001).


Cochabamba is the third largest city in Bolivia and is home to over 600,000 people. For over 30 years, water services managed by the City was plagued with maintenance and administrative problems and only half of the population was being served. In 1999, the National government developed and passed the legal guideline for PPPs with little involvement of stakeholders.

An international consortium that operated under the name Aguas del Tunari was subsequently contracted for the PPP Water Project. Within two months of operation, Aguas del Tunari increased supplied water to citizens by 30% by repairing the existing system.

However, because of the governments structuring of the contract, and inclusion of a multi-faceted project that included construction of the Misicuni dam, and the use of water for power generation, irrigation and water supply to the city, Aguas del Tunari increased the average tariff by 35%. Public officials were to inform the public about this increase but did not carry through on this commitment.

Also, because AdT was granted the exclusive right of water resources in Cochabamba, many private wells were immediately shut down. Water vendors that supplied water to poorer citizens were no longer able to sell water. This had negative political implications.

By January 2000 – three months into Aguas del Tunari operations, significant public opposition emerged. A series of protests were staged and escalated to the point that the military was sent to Cochabamba to restore the peace. Most Aguas del Tunari personnel abandoned their offices and the government cancelled the contract.

In 2004, a new partnership was formed that included the municipal government, a private sector consortium, local communities and a non-profit foundation that worked to unite stakeholders and improve coordination of service delivery.

The new partnership avoided many of the problems that had faced the first contract by focusing on community involvement at an early stage in the project. Local water committees were established that helped set priorities. Future water mainlines will be built according to projected demand. The project also used the services of a local enterprise that had experience designing and building water supply networks and could offer training to community citizens. The ApT partnership also received funding which allowed communities to build self-financed secondary networks through the private operator in their neighborhoods.

By relying on a local participatory, demand-driven approach, the partnership attracted the attention of international organizations and was selected for the Supporting Entrepreneurs in Environment and Development Initiative Partnership Award in 2006.

Source: Case study compiled for the Tanzanian Community Engagement Framework (Government of Tanzania, 2018)

BOX 4.1 Urban water expansion in Cochabamba, Bolivia


KEY POINTS

In summary, when CAs and subsequently private partners adequately resource community engagement for PPPs, their efforts will help:

• deliver services valued by the community;

• keep charges to a reasonable level;

• involve communities in solutions to any problems that emerge;

• attain and sustain support from communities,

• manage expectations so they are realistic and achievable,

• manage risks and avoid the potential for disagreements; and

• reduce the prospect of delay and disruption.

The result is that PPPs with good community engagement are likely to be:

• more responsive to users;

• more sustainable;

• more resilient to change; and

• more likely to attract good private partners and affordable financing.

The aim is to produce positive results such as shown in Box 4.2 for the West Bank Solid Waste Management PPP.

Good community engagement strengthens a PPP

CAs should initiate community engagement early on behalf of all parties

In 2010/2011, the Joint Service Council for Solid Waste Management (SWM) for Hebron and Bethlehem in Palestine, with the support of the World Bank and the International Financial Corporation embarked to attract a private partner to operate and maintain new waste treatment facilities for Hebron and Bethlehem Governorates. Community engagement was a key part of the PPP process and included:

• Nine community meetings (5 in Hebron Governorate and 4 in Bethlehem Governorate), where the public were invited to discuss SWM issues;

• Interviews with SWM staff in eight additional municipalities and village councils;

• Interviews with senior staff from the Joint Service Council for Hebron and the Joint Service Council for Bethlehem; and

• Focus group meetings, one in each Governorate (which were attended by SWM staff of several municipalities and village councils, Joint Service Councils, and World Bank Group project team and citizens.

The community engagement was successful in eliciting information from the public/households on socioeconomic characteristics as well as the SWM system. Proactive engagement with the communities also contributed to the success of the project by:

• Creating an environment where the public was willing to participate in discussions, ask for clarifications and raise their concerns; and

BOX 4.2 Engagement Activities for the West Bank Solid Waste Management PPP


• Acknowledging the public’s role in designing and implementing an improved overall system

“The project was a very interesting and rich one. It involved various stakeholders, as will be expected with PPPs, including around 30 municipalities, waste management authorities (namely the Joint Service Council for Hebron and Bethlehem), and private sector partners. The World Bank (GPOBA) component of the project, also highlighted the importance of outreach to all municipalities involved and the importance of explaining the positive impact of the project on end users and the environment. Tailoring the project to the specific needs and circumstances of the country took a concerted effort by project stakeholders to arrive at the successful outcome.” M Alnassa, IMF Palestine

Source: Case study compiled for the Tanzanian Community Engagement Framework (Government of Tanzania, 2018)

Box 4.2 Continued


START ENGAGEMENT EARLY

CAs need to initiate the community engagement early to maximize the potential benefits of engagement.

Ideally, community citizens, organizations and groups should be identified and invited to contribute to project design from the earliest stages of Project Identification (African Development Bank 2001). Bringing the community in the project from the earliest planning can strengthen ownership and involvement and enhance the project’s benefits and sustainability.

Governments may be uncomfortable engaging when they lack information about a proposed project. They may for example wish to avoid creating expectations for a project that is a long way from fruition of may not materialize or may want to avoid being seen as unprepared if stakeholders raise questions. Information gaps are inevitable early in project identification and preparation.

Starting community early is however important as inputs from the community are often pivotal to whether a project is needed, or may succeed, in finding answers to challenges. Government concerns in starting early can be managed. For example, by making clear the status of the project and the explorative nature of early project identification and preparation. Keeping engagement simple can also help in managing expectations.

In the early phases of project preparation when resources are scarce, focusing on engagement with representative groups and utilizing a CA’s internal expertise may be the most effective way to start.

CUSTOMIZE THE ENGAGEMENT

The development and implementation of a clearly laid out plan that is tailored to each PPP phase will ensure that engagement activities are proactive and delivered in a timely way (International Finance Corporation 2007a,b).

To help ensure engagement is proactive and contributes to scoping social objectives, community investment and overall planning and implementation, CAs should link the engagement activities to other relevant engagement efforts. For example, community engagement should link to any Environmental and Social Impact Assessment undertaken or resettlement planning. Linking with other engagement efforts can help reduce overall costs and lift impacts.

IDENTIFY THE COMMUNITIES CAREFULLY

Identifying community citizens, groups and organizations too broadly may be cumbersome and open a project to risks. However, defining community groups and members too narrowly may result in potentially influential and underserved

Initiate community engagement early and continue throughout the life of the project

Engagement activities should be tailored for each phase of the PPP

5.0 PRINCIPLES


or vulnerable community citizens/groups being overlooked, and undermine local ownership and support (World Bank 2017). Including a diversity of community citizens/groups/organizations will improve understanding of the PPP including potential project risks.

While it may take extra effort or innovation to contact and engage groups that don’t generally come forward on their own, including these groups is important to get a more fulsome picture from the engagement process. Extra effort should be made to bring the vulnerable members of the community (e.g., elderly, female-headed households, children, those with disabilities) into the community engagement; their views are often overlooked.

Engagement should also include individuals and organizations that are known opponents to a PPP.

ENCOURAGE TRANSPARENCY AND TRUST

The complex nature of PPPs, the typical lack of familiarity with PPPs and the potential for political dimensions to emerge requires that the planning and implementation be conducted with integrity and transparency.

Many PPPs are highly visible and politically sensitive, at least locally. Transparency and timely access to information are important to the principles of accountability and governance. Lack of information leads to misinformation that can fuels community fears, but, maintaining open and honest engagement with a wide range of community citizens, groups and organizations, and making PPP planning and procurement documents publicly accessible, can:

• reduce the chance of corruption; and

• build trust in the community.

Ensure a broad coverage of community stakeholders, but not too broad

Preparing projects in an open and accountable manner reduces risks and improves quality


This can pave the path for two-way dialog on contentious issues, so people’s concerns and misconceptions are understood and addressed promptly before public confidence and trust are eroded (Calabrese 2008).

This principle aligns with the World Bank’s Framework for Disclosure in PPP Initiative, which provides a systematic structure for disclosing information proactively throughout the PPP project lifecycle, including pre-procurement and performance monitoring.8

ENSURE CLARITY

PPPs are different from regular projects that CAs may develop. A PPP must generate revenue that will pay for the service or infrastructure that is being built. The PPP must also be clear about the cost to users of the Project, especially if the Project will charge fees or rents to users. For PPPs to be successful the private sector partner needs to earn an acceptable financial return on their investment and in cases where fees or rents are charged, these need to be set at a level that users are willing to pay. Therefore, being clear and open with the community about the economic viability of the PPP is important.

The community is more likely to support PPPs if they understand that partnering with the Private sector was necessary to:

• obtain capital for new investments;

• improve access to services; or

• prevent possible closures of publicly funded facilities of services.

BE ACCOUNTABLE AND MONITOR

It is important for the community to see the impact of their involvement and have access to the reports and summaries of the engagement. Having a systematic, rigorous system for tracking potential issues, conflicting views, project costs, benefits and compensation measures is key to providing feedback to all parties in a transparent and defensible way. Workable grievance redress mechanisms are an important element of an effective process.

Short-term achievements, whether quantifiable or not, should be brought to public’s attention to sustain confidence in a CAs commitment and ability to deliver. Systematic issues tracking will help those facilitating engagement activities prepare for meetings/engagement activities with certain groups, and ensure consistent messaging around both broad, and specific project issues.

PURSUE THE BEST METHOD OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

The CAs should be open to the use of different methods for sharing information and receiving feedback during different phases of the PPP. Examples of tools and techniques for community engagement are presented in the Appendices of this global guide and can be modified and adapted in country specific PPP engagement guidelines.

Aim for clarity on the nature of the project, its status and assessments

Track issues provide ways of solving grievances and report on progress

8 https://ppp.worldbank.org/public-private-partnership/overview/practical-tools/good-governance-anticorruption

The method used should be the one that works best!


Generally, good practice combines written and electronic engagement with face-to- face methods. Communication activities that were solely based on the output of products, such as radio and TV spots, newspaper ads, and the like, are no longer sufficient to meet the demands for participation, accountability, and transparency (Calabrese 2008). The Community must be directly involved.

Since a sound engagement program requires a clear understanding of the community’s perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors vis-à-vis partnering with the private sector, an engagement programs should be designed to collect both qualitative and quantitative information (Calabrese 2008).


SETTING THE SCENE

While the exact nature of community engagement will depend on the PPP being considered and an array of social and environmental factors, this global guide presents six common steps in community engagement that should fit most circumstances. The six steps provide a starting point to community engagement that can be aligned to the realities of individual countries as they adopt the ideas in this guide for their specific circumstances.

For convenience, the six steps are written from the perspective of a CA. This is because CAs need to initiate community engagement and will hold most of the responsibility during project preparation. The CA will have an ongoing role in community engagement throughout the subsequent implementation. Some responsibilities will also be picked up by the private partner as implementation of the PPP commences. The broad requirements for community engagement will be set out in the PPP agreement. The private partner should also follow the six steps as they undertake these community engagement obligations, building on the CA’s earlier efforts.

The six steps should work for most PPPs

6.0 THE SIX STEPS



Being clear about the purpose of engagement and the key issues to address will set the context for community interactions and manage expectations of those participating in the process. To define the purpose, the CA must first agree on what can be accomplished with the engagement.


Create a list of who to engage, with all the community citizens, groups and organizations that could have an interest in the PPP or have some influence over the success of the PPP. The list is a living-document and will develop over time. It is important to put a solid effort into creating the initial list.

Step 3: Conduct a Community Engagement Mapping

To complete a community engagement mapping, the CA and private partner at different stages will need to consider both the interest and influence a community group, citizen and organizations may have in the project.


Different methods can be used by the CA and the private partner to engage communities. They should develop a project specific community engagement plan that describes proposed engagement strategies, tools, and schedule for engagement. The plan should evolve over the different phases of a PPP.


An issue tracking table should be created to document ideas, concerns or questions about the PPP. The CA and private partner need a systematic way of managing complaints and grievances at different phases of PPPs.


Accurately recording community feedback, sharing it within government and with the community for preparing a project is why engagement processes occur. It is a critical step in building trust and support among the community.

BOX 6.1 The Six Steps at a Glance

Define purpose of

engagement


Conduct community

mapping



process



STEP 1: DEFINE THE PURPOSE OF ENGAGEMENT

The CA should develop a simple statement that outlines the purpose of the community engagement at the initial PPP Phase, and then add more details as they move to later PPP Phases. A sample of such a statement of purpose is included in Box 6.2.

Being clear about the purpose of engagement will set the context for interactions with the community and manage expectations for those participating in the process. To define the purpose, a CA must first be clear on what can be achieved through the engagement. Alternative ways of depicting the purpose of consultation are summarized in Box 6.3.

Clearly defining “why” the CA is reaching out to the community and how their input can influence the design and decision-making process for a PPP will help:

• identify the appropriate mechanism for engagement,

• serve as an important reference point throughout the engagement process, and

• help participants understand what they are part of so they can make an informed choice about getting involved in the first place.

Once the purpose of engagement has been defined, CAs should agree on what level of participation is actually being sought. This will depend on the phase of the PPP and the type of project being proposed. Engagement should deepen as project preparation proceeds. And when communities are the users of the services delivered by a PPP, even more intensive engagement is required compared to a situation where, for the same PPP, the community’s role is limited to that of a neighbor.

Other issues to consider when determining the level of participation include the environmental and social sensitivity of sites, project timeframes and available CA resources and funding.

Linkages to other stakeholder engagement processes are also important to consider. For example, if the CA anticipates an environmental and social impact assessment will be needed, they should set a purposes for community engagement that will link to such an assessment.

Define purpose of

engagement


Conduct community

mapping



process



The community engagement process will Involve the community by providing an opportunity for them to receive and share information, ideas, issues and concerns about the proposed PPP. The inclusion of community citizens, groups and organizations input into the design and development of the project will help ensure community buy-in to the PPP and create an environment that enhances the economic viability of the project. Community engagement will also ensure that accurate information about the PPP is shared with the community to manage the expectations of the community about what the project will achieve and to correct any misinformation or misperceptions that could undermine the PPP if not addressed.

The community engagement will include a variety of community citizens, groups and organizations and will consider their capacity, ability, and resources to be engaged.

Goals:

The CA will strive to include all affected citizens, groups and organizations by taking into consideration the barriers community citizens or groups have with being able to engage.

The CA will also be realistic with the level of effort they can apply to the engagement program, as the CA has limits to resource and capacity.

We will strive to be inclusive, practical and realistic with all its community engagement efforts for the proposed XYZ PPP.

Objectives:

Provide information to community citizens, groups and organizations

Collect and consider information from the community in the design of the XYZ PPP

Adjust the engagement process to reflect changes in the community citizens, groups and organizations or the method for engaging them, as needed.

BOX 6.2 Sample Statement of Purpose of Community Engagement


To provide the community balanced and objective information to assist them in understanding why a PPP project is being proposed, what community issues it will address, and potential alternatives. This type of engagement may be considered during initial education or awareness raising campaigns for PPP projects. What can be changed about the project? CAs don’t expect any alternative to the project concept will be considered but will continue to update community members as more detailed Project information becomes available.

To obtain community feedback for decision maker’s analysis, consideration of alternatives or final decisions. This level of engagement may be considered at the project identification phase. For example, if an CA is proposing a PPP project to address a public need and have several locations that might be suitable for the development, they can consult the community on the options and collect their input. What can be changed about the project? CAs are willing to adjust Project designs, locations, or modes of service delivery based on feedback received during the engagement process.

To work directly with the community throughout the process to identify issues, concerns and aspirations which are consistently understood and considered in the decision-making process. This level of engagement regularly involves community members in the decision-making process although it is understood that PPP projects are likely to work with different stakeholder groups at different phases of the project. Regular feedback informing the community about how their input was factored into Project design and related decisions, or why it was not, is a key characteristic of this level of engagement. What can be changed about the project? CAs will actively seek community input to further define the PPP Project concept (size, location, mode of service delivery etc.) and/or are willing to consider alternative Project concepts to address local needs.

To partner with the community in each aspect of Project decision making, including the development of alternatives and the identification of the preferred solution. In a PPP Project, this requires collaboration between the government (such as the CA), the Private Sector partner and community stakeholders, and once procured, the private sector partner. Community Advisory Groups may be a forum to share information and develop solutions jointly. What can be changed about the project? CAs are looking for input from citizens to make recommendations for how to design the PPP Project (size, location, mode of service delivery etc.) and how Partnerships are structured.

To place the final decision-making power in the hands of the Community. Due to the contractual nature of PPPs and the requirement for the CAs or the PPP to deliver certain products or services at a specific price on a specific schedule, there are limited circumstances when this level of engagement will be applied to a PPP Projects. What can be changed about the project? CAs are looking to citizens to be directly involved in designing the PPP Project including ideas and solutions for how to structure Partnerships and they are ultimately implemented.

Source: Adapted from the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2)-Public Participation Spectrum

BOX 6.3 The Consultation Spectrum


STEP 2: DECIDE WHICH COMMUNITY CITIZENS AND GROUPS TO ENGAGE

The identification of community citizens, groups and organizations should be seen as a living process that will evolve over time.

The initial identification of those in the community to engage can be done by CAs as a desk-top exercise, using published information or potentially the knowledge of the CA staff. This should then be followed up with outreach to the community, to identify individuals or groups not familiar to the CA staff. The list will change over time, and the CA should update the list on an ongoing basis.

There are many documents in the public domain that list different types of groups, organizations and citizens that could be included in an engagement processes. Some groups that should be considered as CAs create their own lists are presented below in Figure 6.1.

Define purpose of

engagement


Conduct community

mapping



process



FIGURE 6.1 Key Community Groups

Special Interest & Civil Society OrganizationsOrganization representing Disabled Peoples Local UniversitiesSports or Hobby clubsYouth GroupsNGOs

Community Leaders• CAs• Town or Village Level Politicians• Tribal/Ethnic Leaders• Elders and other respected people

in the community• Youth leaders• Women leaders

Local Community and Voluntary GroupsCommunity AssociationsUtility User GroupsTransportation Associations

Social Service ProvidersEmergency ResponsePolice, Fire Department, AmbulancesHealth Service ProvidersHospitals, Health & Wellness organizationsChildren’s organizationsEnergy Service providersSchoolsCommunication Providers

Local Political PartiesMunicipal level politiciansState or Regional level politiciansNation level politicians

Faith Based, Ethnic and Cultural GroupsReligious GroupsIndigenous Peoples

Women’s GroupsLocal Women Shelter NetworkWomen’s Legal Aid Centre

Business Development GroupsRegional and District Business CouncilLocal Chamber of CommerceWomen’s Chamber of CommerceDistrict Consultative Committees

LaborEmployees of government agencies to be restructuredTrade unions

Local Citizens & End Users• Homeowners• Tenants/Renters• Informal/illegal settlements• Farmers/herders• Vendors• Local Business owners• Commuters• Consumers


STEP 3: CONDUCT THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT MAPPING

Not all community citizens, groups and organizations need to receive the same level of engagement. CAs will need to map the level of interest and influence that the different citizens, groups and organizations have in the PPP. This mapping process should be done at the beginning of the PPP process, and then reviewed and adjusted as necessary at each phase of the PPP. The mapping of community citizens, groups and organizations does not mean that the lower priority ones are ignored or forgotten, but instead that each is given an appropriate amount of attention by the CA.

Special attention is required for vulnerable groups (e.g., elderly, female-headed households, children, those with disabilities). Vulnerable groups are often disempowered and lack influence. Bringing them into community engagement can help reverse key manifestations of their vulnerability. The plotting of influence and interest is best overlaid with an assessment of vulnerability and how to engage the vulnerable affected by a PPP.

Directly affected communities, such as individuals or households benefitting from the service or infrastructure or facing adverse impacts due to the project implementation, and groups driving the need for the project, or responsible for project implementation are important to engage.

As CAs answer the questions (Boxes 6.4 and 6.5) about Interest and Influence, they should keep track of their answers and use it to anticipate the issues they think different community groups, citizens or organizations may have. Thinking in advance about the issues and concerns the community may have will help the CA more efficiently develop their community engagement plan.

Based on the analysis of interest and influence, the CAs can plot each community group, citizen and organization as shown a Box 6.6. The plotting is more effective when most if not all cells have at least one entry. The mapping table does not need to look exactly like that shown at Box 6.6, but it should differentiate between lower and higher levels of interests and influence.

Define purpose of

engagement


Conduct community

mapping



process



• Direct Responsibility. Those in the community who are directly responsible for the decisions related to the Project, for example regulators, financers, politicians or administrators.

• Influence Holders. Those in the community that are looked to for guidance or advice such as religious leaders, educators, elders etc.

• Objectors. Those in the community that can sway public opinion or obstruct a decision if not involved.

• Experienced Community Citizens. Those in the community that have previous experience with PPPs or that have been involved in similar community developments in the past.

• Direct interests. Citizens that will use the service as well as individual households or local businesses that live adjacent or proximate to a project area, those that may be affected by traffic, noise, odors etc.

• Direct Economic Interest. Local workers or companies that have an Interest in employment opportunities. This could include interest in improving wages and conditions for staff and contractors, in–migration from other regions in search of employment and economic opportunities generated by the project.

• Revenue Raising Interest. Local politicians interested in additional local tax revenues.

• Political Positioning Interest. Interest in demonstrating their ability to control material benefit flows from the project at the community level for political status at the local or regional level.

• Business Interest. Interest in securing material and labor supply contracts and other sub-contracting opportunities. The primary contracts for PPPs may be awarded to the private sector outside the local community, but there are indirect contracting opportunities that will be of interest to community citizens with small businesses. Equally, if contractors are in place for an existing service that will be operated by the private sector, they may be concerned about potential lost contracts.

BOX 6.4 Kinds of Influence

BOX 6.5 Potential Interests


BOX 6.6 Template Community Engagement Mapping Matrix

Tier 1 (Higher) = Community group, citizen or organization(s) who require in-depth engagement. There is a need for multiple meetings and the use of a variety of engagement tools. The goal of this level of engagement is to attain direct cooperative relationships so that their input is integrated as much as possible. Information and ideas from Tier 1 community engagement is needed for the successful development of the PPP.

Tier 2 (Mid) = Community group, citizen or organization who require a mid-level of engagement. There is a need for multiple engagement activities. The goal with these groups, citizens or organizations is to attain consensus-building relationships by sharing information and using their feedback and input where possible.

Tier 3 (Lower) = Community group, citizen or organization require project updates that are catered for general consumption. It is important for them to have their chance to be informed and for the CA to respond to their questions. The goal for engagement with this Tier is to build understanding and support for the PPP in the general public. If the engagement process can build broad community support for the PPP, then it is more likely to be successfully developed.

INTEREST

Lower Higher

Low

erH

igh

er

INF

LUE

NC

E


CAs may wish to take a further step and list issues that community groups, citizens or organizations have in common. This information can be used to identify which groups have similar issues and concerns and allow CAs to consider ways to more efficiently undertake the engagement, as it might be possible to group community citizens, groups and organizations with similar concerns and issues and address them at the same time or use the same information. Seeing who in the community is concerned about which issues can be useful for CAs as they plan their engagement work.

Example of Tier 1 Group: The community has a very active and well respected religious leader, who many community citizens turn to for advice. This person or their institution’s early understanding or support of the PPP project will be very helpful in creating community awareness of the PPP process. They will be mapped as “High Influence”. As well, this religious leader lives in the community and the citizens of this religious group are likely to be regular users of the PPP therefore they will be mapped as “High Interest”. They will probably be plotted in the top right of the Figure and will be a Tier 1 (High) group, throughout all phases of the PPP. Again, at the concept phase, it may be difficult to determine who is going to be directly affected by a project, but beginning to engage with community groups, citizens or organizations who might be central to the project success makes good business sense.

Example of Tier 2 Group: The CA is proposing to build a central market building and there is a local NGO that is active in the community with a focus on water supply to citizens. The NGO will like to contribute ideas during Project design about water supply to the market. The NGO also has network of contacts in the community who can help distribute information about the PPP to their citizens. In this example, the NGO will have a medium level of Interest during the initial phases of the PPP and a medium level of influence.

BOX 6.7 Examples of Tier 1 and Tier 2 Groups

TABLE 6.1 Listing Community Groups by Issue

Issue A Issue B Issue C Issue D Issue E

Community Group 1 YES

Community Group 2 YES YES YES

Community Group 3 YES YES

Community Group 4 YES

Community Group 5 YES YES


STEP 4: SELECT METHODS FOR IMPLEMENTING THE ENGAGEMENT PLAN

The CAs should consider different levels of participation. Public participation can be broadly categorized along a spectrum that moves from very little participation (Inform), to high levels of participation (empower).

Different techniques and tools can be used by the CAs to engage the community. As the previous sections described, the list of citizens, groups and organizations, and the approach to engaging each will likely change as the PPP progresses. The Appendices on Tools at the end of this document lists a variety of community engagement techniques and tools that the CA can use after adapting to their country specific situation.

Engagement materials should be concise and use plain language and include drawings and spatial maps whenever possible. Depending on the community, CAs should consider what language(s) they need to use.

Once CAs select their engagement method(s), they should develop a specific engagement plan. The plan should include specific actions to be completed, the schedule for completing the actions, as well as who is responsible for the actions and the resources they will need to implement them, Box 6.8 provides an example outline for an engagement plan.

It is often in the interest of CAs to select a PPP spokesperson and/or team to undertake the engagement. This will help ensure consistency in messaging throughout the PPP process. This team must be adequately resourced, have the authority to speak on behalf of the CA and they must be directly linked to managers overseeing the Project. Having direct and regular contact with project managers will allow the engagement team to effectively share feedback coming from the communities that could shape the ultimate design of the PPP.

Define purpose of

engagement


Conduct community

mapping



process



A Community Engagement Plan should complement the broader Engagement Plan while clearly defining the Purpose, approach, timelines and resources that will be dedicated to identifying community groups, citizens and organizations, seeking input and responding to the feedback received during engagement activities. A Plan should be developed for each PPP Phase

The following is a sample outline for an Engagement Plan. To keep the process simple, it is useful to match the structure of the Community Engagement Guideline to the Structure of the Community Engagement Plan which should be similar to the structure of a Community Engagement Report that the CA will normally write at the end of each PPP Phase

Introduction: Describe the PPP Project, usually only 1 or 2 pages long, although often longer for Procurement and Implementation Phases:• Describe the Issue or Problem that the PPP Project will address.; and• Provide general project details including a spatial map of proposed location, nature of the project, size,

schedule and estimated budge

Purpose of the Engagement: Define what the Community Engagement will achieve, commonly only 1 page long• Goals (type of feedback sought)• Objectives (how input will feed into the Planning and Design of the PPP Project)

Stakeholder Identification: Define who will be engaged. Initial phases may be general groups, while later phases should be very detailed• List Community Stakeholder groups targeted during Engagement• Community Stakeholder mapping and rational for mapping based on Interests and Influence• Special Considerations during each Phase of Engagement

Methods of Engagement: Describe the proposed approach and methods of Engagement• Actions that will be carried out• Required tools and supporting materials• People Responsible• How information from Community Stakeholders will be recorded, shared with Project team• How PPP Project team will provide feedback to Community Stakeholders

Issues Tracking and Grievance Process• Describe the process for receiving and responding issues and complaints• Develop blank issues tracking table to fill in as project progresses• Describe a grievance management process for complaints

Reporting: Describe a grievance management process for complaints• Describe how community engagement outcomes will be reported• Who will the reporting be for, PPP team, community, etc. There may be reports created for different groups

Note: Structure of the report should follow the structure of the Community Engagement Plan

BOX 6.8 Example outline of a Community Engagement Plan


STEP 5: ISSUES TRACKING AND COMPLAINTS MANAGEMENT

The CAs will need to track issues, questions and concerns raised by the community in an organized and consistent way. Documenting the issues, concerns and questions can be done in a variety of formats, ranging from simple spreadsheet to more complex engagement tracking software. For smaller PPPs a well-organized spreadsheet is likely sufficient, and more cost effective than specialized software. However, for PPPs that are larger, a more complex issues tracking systems may be needed.

In addition to new ideas, or questions about a PPP, the community will likely share concerns, and possibly, complaints with the CA. If a process already exists in the country that citizens use to file complaints, CAs should consider combining with or adding to the existing process as opposed to setting up an independent system.

The specific objectives of a Complaints Management Procedure are to:

• Develop an easy-access, no-cost and efficient complaint procedure for the community involved and/or impacted by the Project;

• Help to prevent unrealistic expectations and/or negative perceptions from the local population towards the PPP Project;

• Establish a system of investigation, response and quick complaint resolution;

• Gradually reduce the number of community complaints regarding the Project;

• Improve the Project sustainability through the analysis of complaints; and

• It is important to record all concerns but differentiate between general concerns raised during the process versus official complaints or grievances, so that the appropriate bodies within the CA can respond.

Complaints or grievance management processes often have the following:

• A simple registration process, and acknowledge receipt of grievance and tracking it until it is closed;

• A method to classify categories of complaints;

• Identify responsible authorities that can address complaints. There is often an initial response process internal to the CA or PPP, and if the resolution is not acceptable to the complainant, then subsequent broader community response process(es) could be utilized; and

• Create timelines for providing feedback.

An objective should be to avoid resorting to courts and judicial systems to resolve the complaint.

Grievance and complaints management can become a time-consuming process but putting in the time and effort to establish a process can prevent a complaint from growing into a crisis. The process should be developed as soon as complaints are received, so that an efficient system is developed before the PPP Project advances into more complicated costly, and resource intensive phases, where more complaints and grievances are likely to be received.

Define purpose of

engagement


Conduct community

mapping



process



STEP 6: REPORTING AND MONITORING

Accurately recording community feedback and sharing it with the PPP Team for consideration in planning and project design is a key reason engagement occurs. Reporting and monitoring is critical to building trust and support among participants.

Reporting should target both the internal project team within the PPP and groups external to the PPP – specifically the community at large, regulatory agencies and in some cases funding organizations. Internal reporting can include the engagement issues tracking data, meeting minutes and complaints management reports, as well as summary documents generated to inform project plans and decision-making processes. For consistency, the reports should generally follow the outline of the engagement plan (Box 6.8).

External reports should clearly describe how CAs approached community engagement, timeframes, the level of participation in engagement activities, and summaries of the information that were generated through the engagement process.

CAs will also need to monitor their progress, ensure all sub-groups of the community are engaged, determine if the methods and tools they have selected are effective (or not), and identify where effort and resources will need to be allocated to keep the Project moving forward. Good monitoring will also help CAs consistently respond to issues as they are raised by the community and help inform future engagement processes.

It is strongly recommended that during community meetings and consultations that the Project Spokesperson be supported by a person that can record the feedback shared by participants, recording:

• the date, location;

• list of participants;

• questions being asked; and

• the response provided and any follow-up that might be required.

Reports should be structured in such a way that it is easy for external groups to understand the responses of the CA, and the actions they have taken that led to the decision to proceed with a proposed project or not will assist in reporting to the Project team and regulatory authority.

The overall result of the engagement will be the sum of various inputs received at various phases, through different methods and from all participating groups, citizens and organization, all of which will inform the ultimate decisions shaping a project (EC 2015).

Sometimes, as projects develop, the structure of the proposed PPP can be altered for political, financial, social or environmental reasons. This can then affect the service or infrastructure that the PPP will provide to community citizens. It is good to check

Define purpose of

engagement


Conduct community

mapping



process



back at each phase of the PPP to make sure the project is still going to meet the underlying need of the community.

Reporting and monitoring are closely related to the project concept developed in the inception phase. Taking the time to write a good project concept with the “what” and “why” for the PPP, as well as reviewing these questions at the start of each phase will help serve as a grounding point throughout the project. The reporting and monitoring should indicate if the engagement activities have met the original purpose.


Engagement tools help CAs and the private partner standardize and simplify community engagement, so it can be undertaken faster and at lower cost while achieving a high standard of engagement. The annexes present:

• Checklists to be applied at the different phases of the project cycle to assess if engagement has been adequate before moving onto the next phase. Separate checklists are presented for the inception, preparation/procurement and implementation phases;

• Questions that can be asked by CAs and the private partner to help ratings of interest and influence in Step 2. They can be used to inform thinking about different ways different members of the community may affect PPPs;

• A summary of engagement methods. Ideas and information are presented on what the method involves, its benefits, the challenges faced in its use, the stage of the PPP process is it most effective and suggestions on how to ensure effectiveness. The engagement Techniques and Tools described in the annexes, with an explanation of when to use them, are:

» Direct Meetings with Specific Community Groups;

» General Community Meetings;

» One-on-one meetings with key groups, citizens or organizations;

» Community Task Force or Community Special Committee;

» Information centres, booths, etc.;

» Creative Engagement (songs, plays, art);

» Spatial Mapping;

» Communication and Awareness Campaigns;

» Surveys;

» Public hearings9

• A sample community complaints management mechanism.

Track issues provide ways of solving grievances and report on progress

7.0 ENGAGEMENT TOOLS

9 The list draws on a number of source documents including the World Bank Toolkits for PPP, the Social Planning and Research Council of British Columbia’s Community Engagement Toolkit and the Dundee Scotland Community Engagement Toolkit.


THE PPP PROJECT CYCLE

The details of the PPP project cycle vary across countries and sometimes across

jurisdictions within a country.10 This guide is based on a simplified project cycle that

identifies the:

• Identification Phase, in which the CA identifies potential PPPs, screens them and selects priority projects for preparation. Concept notes or scoping reports (or equivalent documents) are typically prepared to document the PPP;

• Preparation Phase, in which the PPP is designed and subject to assessments to assess its viability and whether it will generate VfM. Assessments normally consider technical, economic, commercial, financial, environmental, social and legal viability. The ESIA and any resettlement planning is best conducted during this phase so environmental and social issues are factored into the decision to proceed to procurement or not and access to sites is clarified. The business case or pre-feasibility then feasibility studies (or equivalent studies) are typically prepared to document the PPP and the findings of the assessments undertaken;

• Procurement Phase, in which a tender is conducted to secure a private partner to the PPP. This phase involves preparing and securing government approval of tender documents and a PPP agreement, seeking bidders, selecting a preferred bidder, and if necessary the conduct of negotiations. The PPP reaches contractual close when the PPP agreement is signed and financial close when all financing agreements are also signed; and

• Implementation Phase, in which the private partner implements the PPP agreement under the supervision of the CA (see Figure 8.1).

Community engagement will vary across the project cycle

FIGURE 8.1 A Simplified PPP Project Cycle

8.0 ENGAGEMENT BY PHASE

10 For discussion of PPP project cycles, see PPP Knowledge Lab (https://pppknowledgelab.org/guide/sections/51-ppp-cycle)


If there is an ongoing need for the public service delivered by the PPP, then the experience of the completed PPP, and potentially also the assets, can then feed into the identification of the next PPP.

Terminology varies across countries, but these four phases can be found in most PPP project cycles. There are important differences between these phases that means community engagement will vary across the cycle.

All six steps in community engagement need to be carried out in each phase of the project cycle. While the detailed use of the six steps will vary from project-to-project, this section illustrates how they can be applied across the cycle. An estimate of the anticipated level of effort across the cycle is illustrated in Figure 8.2.

The application of the six steps by phase is discussed in the annexes. The features are presented below.

FIGURE 8.2 The Six Steps and Estimated Level of Effort Across the Project Cycle


IDENTIFICATION PHASE

CAs need to instigate community engagement as early as possible with a view to ensuring the interests of all parties will be addressed. Although it may be challenging for CAs to adequately resource the early community engagement activities for a PPP, it is important that they understand that there are significant costs for not effectively engaging.

The benefits of early engagement need to be balanced with the real-world limitations of time and resources that the CAs face. CAs with internal engagement experience can undertake the engagement process themselves, using their internal resources and knowledge. Initiating community engagement themselves has the advantage of building the understanding within the CA of the proposed project and establishing all important relationships with the community. If budgets allow, the CA could also draw on the expertise of a consultant.

The community engagement process at this phase is not typically very onerous, and can be focused on identifying potential projects and assessing the general community support for a PPP. At this phase, there is limited detailed information about the exact PPP, therefore the community engagement process is general in nature and may not involve detailed discussions of project specific details.

There may be value in reaching out to a limited number of community citizens, groups or organizations to get their initial input on the PPP concept and any issues or concerns. This feedback can be documented and shared within the CA, and government, more broadly to help them make decisions of which projects to advance to the preparation phase.

At this early phase it must be made clear there is no guarantee the project will proceed. Make sure project information that is presented to the community clearly highlights that the PPP is only a concept at this phase.

PREPARATION PHASE

The preparation phase begins once the CA is confident that a project concept (or equivalent document) is well defined and has secured the required approvals. The preparation phase should build on the work done in the identification phase. There may be multiple stages of engagement during the preparation phase, such as for preparation of a pre-feasibility study then for a feasibility study (or equivalent documents).

Community engagement for the preparation phase typically focuses on collecting input and feedback on the potential PPP and using that information to inform the design of the PPP and assessment of its viability and VfM. The aim is to produce a project design and mitigate project risks such that the PPP addresses community needs while still having a strong business justification that will attract a private sector partner.

The earlier the community engagement begins the better

Engagement is typically high-level at this early stage

Community inputs are needed to inform the design of the PPP


The community input may be preliminary in nature for a pre-feasibility study, then become more definitive and detailed during preparation of a feasibility study (or equivalent studies). Getting input from a variety of community groups, organizations and citizens, including the CA themselves, is a key task in this phase.

The CA may have the capacity to undertake the community engagement activities. Doing so will help the CA understand the project well. But many CAs will, at least initially, call in additional support from external advisors engaged to design the PPP. If so, the CA should ensure earlier engagements is used and they are familiar and comfortable with advisor’s process and deliverables. Over time, as the CAs build their capacity, they may decide to undertake the community engagement for future PPPs themselves.

The increased level of interest can lead to increased community expectations. It will be important to manage community expectations during this phase, as there is no guarantee the project will be proceed until a private sector partner is successfully procured. The CA will have more detailed discussions with potential private sector partners, such as through market testing, and potential private sector partners will likely want to see evidence of effective community engagement activities.

This phase will require a higher level of engagement efforts and therefore the CA will need to estimate their budget and resource appropriately and perhaps expand their community engagement team. There is great value in keeping the CA staff who were involved in the previous phase, involved in this phase. Their involvement can either be directly designing and implementing the engagement or supporting an advisor who is hired to lead the process.

The preparation phase is when the CA undertakes studies to comply with national legislation and, as relevant, international safeguard policies. The community engagement process sits underneath those processes. Some of the information collected during community engagement can be used in reports such as ESIAs.

CAs will need to decide how much engagement they do themselves

Costs will be higher and larger budgets will be needed


PROCUREMENT PHASE

The PPP design should be finalized and approved by the end of the preparation phase. This allows the project to immediately proceed to procurement of the private partner with a clear understanding of what the PPP should do and a plan on how to complete it.

The community does not participate in the procurement process itself. Procurement should be undertaken in an open and transparent manner, preferably on a competitive basis, in accordance with procurement rules established under PPP or other legislation. Procurement will involve pre-bid and other formal meetings that are outside the community engagement process. Community engagement in this phase focuses on keeping the community informed of progress, reinforcing openness and transparency.

Many PPPs create opportunities for both direct and indirect contracting and employment opportunities that local people, service providers and companies can bid on. Engaging with the local community businesses and workers so they understand the bidding process and can submit competitive proposals will help maximize participation. The selection of the preferred bidder will be based on VfM, regardless if they are based locally, or not. However, if local companies are competitive and win bids, it helps increase community acceptance and support of the project.

Where a government has set local empowerment requirements, focused engagement during the procurement phase can help achieve these. CAs may for example help potential local partners and labor understand and get ready for the business and employment opportunities the PPP may offer. These opportunities may be realized as bidders to a PPP, such as though a consortium, suppliers or sub-contractors.

As with the previous phase, community engagement should start from, and build on, what has already been done. The CA may consider hiring a consultant to undertake the community engagement, or if they have the capacity and resources, they can do the engagement themselves.

It is important to have finalized a clear plan for community engagement to be implemented over the implementation phase. This is the last opportunity to ready the plan before the private partner takes on their responsibilities via the PPP agreement. Inputs such as detailing the engagement activities, key performance indicators (KPIs) that can be used to report back to the community and demonstrate follow-through need to be finalized.

IMPLEMENTATION PHASE

Construction will take place followed by the long-term operation of the project during this phase. As the PPP is constructed and begins operations, community engagement remains just as important as previous phases, although it becomes a longer-term effort. One of the risks to the project that should be guarded against is becoming complacent and discontinuing active engagement of the community.

Communities are not involved in the procurement itself

Community engagement should instead reinforce openness and transparency in procurement


The private partner will begin to share responsibilities for community engagement during the implementation phase. This guide suggests allocating responsibilities between the private partner and the CA in line with their roles in the PPP. That is, the private partner will take on much of the day-to- day responsibility for engagement with the CA to monitor the private partner’s activities.

The requirements on the private partner will be set out in the PPP agreement, at least at a high level. A community engagement plan (or similar document) should be established by the CA for the private partner to use. This will describe management strategies, mitigation measures, monitoring arrangements a in place, among other measures to deal with such complaints The CA should have prepared this before procurement drawing on information developed during previous phases. As discussed later in this chapter, careful tracking of the follow-through on project commitments is critical during construction and operation.

The PPP will be generating revenue and some of it should be allocated to funding the community engagement program. Establishing a source of funding facilitates longer term planning and this will increase the quality of the overall engagement effort. But that does not mean over-spending on engagement. As for earlier phases, the level of engagement should be appropriate to the needs and available resources.

The private partner will join the community engagement during implementation

The CA needs to set out what is required


The six steps and other suggestions of this guide could be usefully embedded in country or jurisdiction-specific community guidelines. Such guidelines should capture the existing process; the likelihood that CAs will use a guideline increases considerably if it mirrors their current engagement process as much as possible.

For example, the PPP Community Engagement Guideline for Tanzania built on and strengthened existing practices. The development of the Tanzanian specific guideline required a series of meetings across a broad range of CAs and PPPs, with visits to CA offices and sites to observe how they undertook community engagement, the terminology they used and the resources and capacity they had.

At the same time, preparation of a country or jurisdiction-specific community engagement guideline provides an opportunity to enhance processes in use where there is a gap with good practices, such as set out in the World Bank’s Environmental and Social Framework and the International Finance Corporation’s Performance Standards. Good practices are captured within the principles of this guide, the 6 steps and other suggestions.

It is important to be careful and not to require CAs, especially those new to community engagement or with very limited resources, to utilize the latest leading-edge engagement technique or undertake processes that are beyond their capacity. What matters most is ensuring the core requirements of good practices are in place. It will help to use engagement terminology similar to that already in use locally, avoiding the use of jargon that may only be common in international public participation circles.

The method used should be the one that works best!

9.0 FINAL THOUGHTS


Country or jurisdiction-specific guidelines should reference and acknowledge the good engagement work that many CAs already do. Guidelines that highlight all the great things CAs are already doing are more likely to be used, than one that describes the CAs current work as ”not good enough”.

Countries using PPPs will have national level policy or legislation that guide PPPs. It is not uncommon for the policies or legislation to reference, or mention, stakeholder engagement, although the level of detail about how to undertake the engagement or what is sufficient engagement is not always defined. CAs should ensure that they integrate the legislative requirements for PPPs into the design of their community specific engagement process.

PPP projects will often trigger other national legislation during various phases of the PPP development. For example, during the feasibility phase, PPP Projects will likely need to undertake environmental and social impact assessments of some variety, or there could be requirements related to land use designation. Most of these national processes will require engagement with affected stakeholders. The multilateral development banks and many other lenders have similar requirements for projects they support.11 The community engagement process can inform or feed into and combine with these legislative requirements for engagement, thereby saving CAs time and avoiding duplicating efforts.12

11 For example, the World Bank’s Environmental and Social Standard ESS10: Stakeholder Engagement and Information Disclosure recognizes the importance of open and transparent engagement between the Borrower and project stakeholders as an essential element of good international practice. Effective stakeholder engagement can improve the environmental and social sustainability of projects, enhance project acceptance, and make a significant contribution to successful project design and implementation (World Bank 2016).

12 For example, the World Bank’s Template for ESS10: Stakeholder Engagement and Information Disclosure: Stakeholder Engagement Plan and Stakeholder Engagement Framework asks for a brief summary of previous stakeholder engagement activities. The results of using the guide provide such information (World Bank. 2018).


Appendix 1 - Sample Checklists



☐ Yes ☐ NoWas specific information about community meetings collected by the CA? If the CA is using a consultant, did this information get shared with the consultant?

☐ Yes ☐ No Was a simple purpose statement developed prior to community engagement activities?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWere the goal(s) and objective(s) of the community engagement process clearly defined at the start of the PPP Phase? (What are the tasks to be completed, what are the goals to achieve the purpose)

Step 2: Decide Which Community Citizens and Groups to Engage

☐ Yes ☐ NoDid the CA identify who internally in the CA will be involved in community engagement? If the CA is using a Consultant, did they identify key CA staff to involve in the process?

☐ Yes ☐ NoDid the process define which community citizens, groups and organizations will be contacted for preliminary engagement activities? As this is a PPP, were businesses considered?

Step 3: Conduct the Community Engagement Mapping

☐ Yes ☐ NoDid the CA determine if it was necessary to complete a preliminary mapping of community citizens, groups and organizations?

☐ Yes ☐ NoDid the CA undertake a desktop exercise to assess the level of influence and interest community citizens, groups and organizations will have on the conceptual PPP?

☐ Yes ☐ NoDid the results of the assessment get inputted into an engagement Mapping Matrix for the PPP Phase?


☐ Yes ☐ NoGiven the limited nature of the community engagement during the Identification Phase, were appropriate methods for engagement selected?

☐ Yes ☐ No Were there enough internal and external resources to implement the engagement tools?

☐ Yes ☐ No Is there enough time to adequately finish the community engagement?


☐ Yes ☐ No Was a simple issue tracking table used to collect community input during any engagement activities?


☐ Yes ☐ No Was a Report of the community engagement process and results written?

☐ Yes ☐ NoDid the final report contain summary section, overview of issues, methods used for engagement, summary of the actual engagement meetings or events, analysis of results and recommendations, costs, next steps.

Budget

☐ Yes ☐ NoWas a budget for the time or fees needed to complete the project developed, taking into consideration, the time for CA staff to undertake the process; time for any consultants working with the CA; and any other time/fees required?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWas a budget for the expenses needed to undertake community engagement developed, taking into consideration, the costs for advertising, hosting meetings or events, the materials need for engagement and any other expenses?

☐ Yes ☐ No Was the budget enough overall?


PREPARATION AND PROCUREMENT PHASES


☐ Yes ☐ NoWas the information and results of earlier community engagement considered when defining the purpose of community engagement in this phase?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWas the purpose of the community engagement process clearly defined at the start of the PPP phase? Did it describe how the community’s input will be utilized?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWere the goal(s) and objective(s) of the community engagement process clearly defined at the start of the PPP Phase?

☐ Yes ☐ NoDid the purpose, goals and objectives consider how the community engagement could assist other PPP efforts, such as providing input into studies and assessments needed for the PPP (e.g., the prefeasibility and feasibility studies, ESIAs)?


☐ Yes ☐ NoWas the list of community citizens, groups and organizations from the previous phase used as the starting point for the list in this phase?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWas the list updated to reflect feedback and information collected during previous engagement activities?

☐ Yes ☐ No Was the list updated during this phase as new citizens, groups or organizations were identified?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWas specific consideration given to including groups or organizations related to local businesses and employment on the list?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWas a community engagement list created with contact information for identified citizens, groups and organizations?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWas consideration given to including groups or organizations related to local businesses and employment on the list?

☐ Yes ☐ No Was special consideration given to vulnerable groups?


☐ Yes ☐ NoDid the process define the level of interest community citizens, groups and organizations will have in the PPP? Did the mapping consider how the level of interest may have changed from the previous phase?

☐ Yes ☐ NoDid the process define the level of influence community citizens, groups and organizations will have over the PPP? Did the mapping consider how the level of influence may have changed from the previous phase?

☐ Yes ☐ No Was a community engagement mapping matrix developed for the PPP?

☐ Yes ☐ No Was the mapping matrix reviewed by the CA?

☐ Yes ☐ NoDid the mapping matrix inform the level of engagement for each community citizen, group or organization? (No groups, organization or member should be ignored, but limited resources need to be used efficiently)


☐ Yes ☐ NoWere a variety of engagement methods that will be appropriate for the specific communities affect by the PPP considered?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWas a list of the engagement tools and process they will use developed? (timelines, dates, target audience, key messages, expected outcomes, responsibility, budget)

☐ Yes ☐ No Were there enough internal and external resources to implement the engagement methods selected?

☐ Yes ☐ No Was there enough time to adequately finish the community engagement?

☐ Yes ☐ No Was the procedure clear on how to manage expectations during engagement activities?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWere the issues and concerns raised during the engagement considered in the implementation of this phase of the PPP?




☐ Yes ☐ NoWas the information and results of earlier community engagement considered when defining the purpose of community engagement in this phase

☐ Yes ☐ NoWas the purpose of the community engagement process clearly defined at the start of the PPP phase? Did it describe how the community’s input will be utilized?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWere the goal(s) and objective(s) of the community engagement process clearly defined at the start of the PPP Phase?

☐ Yes ☐ No Did the purpose, goals and objectives consider the long-term nature of the PPP and its implications?

☐ Yes ☐ No Were the separate roles and responsibilities of the CA and private partner clear?

☐ Yes ☐ No Will/was the purpose, goal(s) and objectives be reviewed periodically (e.g. every 3 to 5 years)?


☐ Yes ☐ NoWas the list of community citizens, groups and organizations from the previous phase used as the starting point for the list in this phase?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWas the list updated to reflect feedback and information collected during previous engagement activities?

☐ Yes ☐ No Was the list updated during this phase as new citizens, groups or organizations were identified?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWas specific consideration given to including groups or organizations related to local businesses and employment on the list?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWas a community engagement list created with contact information for identified citizens, groups and organizations?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWas consideration given to including groups or organizations related to local businesses and employment on the list?

☐ Yes ☐ No Was special consideration given to vulnerable groups?


☐ Yes ☐ NoDid the process define the level of interest community citizens, groups and organizations will have in the PPP? Did the mapping consider how the level of interest may have changed from the previous phase?

☐ Yes ☐ NoDid the process define the level of influence community citizens, groups and organizations will have over the PPP? Did the mapping consider how the level of influence may have changed from the previous phase?

☐ Yes ☐ No Was a community engagement mapping matrix developed for the PPP?

☐ Yes ☐ No Was the mapping matrix reviewed by the CA?

☐ Yes ☐ NoDid the mapping matrix inform the level of engagement for each community citizen, group or organization? (No groups, organization or member should be ignored, but limited resources need to be used efficiently)


☐ Yes ☐ NoWere a variety of engagement methods that will be appropriate for the specific communities affect by the PPP considered?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWas a list of the engagement tools and process they will use developed? (timelines, dates, target audience, key messages, expected outcomes, responsibility, budget)

☐ Yes ☐ No Were there enough internal and external resources to implement the engagement methods selected?

☐ Yes ☐ No Was there enough time to adequately finish the community engagement?

☐ Yes ☐ No Was the procedure clear on how to manage expectations during engagement activities?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWere the issues and concerns raised during the engagement considered in the implementation of this phase of the PPP?

☐ Yes ☐ No Did the CA and private partner implement their separate roles and responsibilities?



☐ Yes ☐ NoDid the procedure incorporate an issue tracking and complaints management process that integrates with the CAs existing complaints management procedure?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWas the procedure to provide input, ideas, concerns and complaints easy to access, no cost and efficient?

☐ Yes ☐ NoIs there a clear record of issues and complaints received and how they were responded to and considered in project design?

☐ Yes ☐ No Were the separate roles and responsibilities of the CA and private partner clear?


☐ Yes ☐ NoWere reports of the community engagement process and results released periodically in accordance with the timelines of the community engagement plan?

☐ Yes ☐ NoDid the reports determine if the engagement met the purpose and objectives defined at the start of the phase?

☐ Yes ☐ NoDid the reports assess key performance indicators (what are the KPIs, was the project achieving the KPIs?)

☐ Yes ☐ NoDid the final report contain summary section, overview of issues, methods used for engagement, summary of the actual engagement meetings or events, analysis of results and recommendations, costs, next steps.

☐ Yes ☐ NoWas the performance of the CA and private partner reported on based on their separate roles and responsibilities?

Budget

☐ Yes ☐ NoWas a budget for the time (fees) needed to complete the project developed, taking into consideration, the time for staff to undertake the process; time for any consultants working, and any other time/fees required?

☐ Yes ☐ NoWas a budget for the expenses needed to complete the project developed, taking into consideration, the costs for advertising, hosting meetings or events, the materials need for engagement and any other expenses?

☐ Yes ☐ No Was the budget enough overall?


Appendix 2 – Assessing Interest and Influence

ASSESSING INFLUENCE

Source of influence

What level of influence does the community group, citizen or organization have in the project

High Medium Low

Does the Community group, citizen or organization have authority to issue permits, approvals, license, etc. needed by the Project?

The Community group, citizen or organization is the provider of a permit, approval, license, etc., needed by the Project, and the process for getting the permit, license, etc. changes for each project and is not prescriptive.

The issuer of the permit requires that engagement occur with the PPP at this phase.

The Community Group, citizen or organization is the provider of a permit, approval, license, etc., needed by the Project, and the process for getting the permit, license, etc. is well understood and consistently applied to all Projects.

The issuer of the permit or license does not expect to receive applications at this phase but wants to be kept informed of progress.

The Community Group, citizen or organization does not issue permit, approval, license, etc., needed by the Project.

The issuer of the license of permit does not expect to receive applications at this phase and does not have an interest in being engaged as this early phase.

Is support or acceptance of the Project by a specific Community needed? Keep in mind that not all “permission” is official. Is the acceptance of the Project by certain influential group, citizen or organizations required?

The community group, citizen or organization has a key official or un-official role in the community and getting their early acceptance or support of the Project is necessary.

The Community Group, citizen or organization is key influential community citizens and their early support or acceptance of the project will be helpful. Keeping them informed as the project advances to a more detailed design is required.

The group, citizen or organization has a minor influence in the community and their early support will be somewhat helpful but not necessary. They may play a more important or influential role at later phases, but not at this phase.

Is the community group, citizen or organization the end user of the PPP service or infrastructure, and is their use of the PPP necessary for the financial success of the project?

It is clear the community group, citizen or organization will be the primary end user of the PPP service or infrastructure.

The Community Group, citizen or organization might be the primary end user, or they will sometimes use the service or infrastructure provided by the PPP.

It is not clear how much the community Group, citizen or organization will only use the service or infrastructure provided by the PPP. It is likely to not be a core service for this group, citizen or organization.

Is the Project required by regulation to consult with a specific community group, citizen or organization?

The Project is required by regulation to consult with the specific group, citizen or organization.

It is suggested by the regulations that the Project should consult with the specific group, citizen or organization.

There is no regulatory requirement to consult with the group, citizen or organizations.

Is the community group, citizen or organizations able to assist with identifying issues or enhancing project design?

The Community group, citizen or organizations can provide specific information that is crucial to the success of the Project.

The Community group, citizen or organizations can provide information that may be useful for the Project.

The Community group, citizen or organizations might have general information about the Project.


ASSESSING INTEREST

Source of influence

What level of influence does the community group, citizen or organization have in the project

High Medium Low

Which community group, citizen or organizations will have their livelihood affected by the Project?

It is clear at this early phase that the majority of their livelihood will be affected by the Project.

They work in a business sector that may be affected by the Project, but it is not their primary source of employment or business.

It is not clear if the PPP will overlap with the business or work of the group, citizen or organization.

None or only a small portion of their livelihood overlaps with the Project.

It seems very unlikely that the livelihood of the community group, citizen or organization will overlap with the business being proposed by the Project.

Which community group, citizen or organizations provide a social service that will be affected by the Project?

The community group, citizen or organization is the primary provider of their service in the Project area, and community citizens cannot easily access the service in other locations not affected by the Project.

The community group, citizen or organization provides a social service that is affected by the Project, but community citizens can access the service in other locations or with other similar service providers unaffected by the Project.

It is not clear if the PPP will overlap with the service provided or used by the community group, citizen or organization.

The Project does not really affect the service provider or the general community’s ability to access the service.

Which community groups, citizens or organizations are responsible for infrastructure that will be affected by the Project?

The community groups, citizens or organizations manages the only infrastructure of its type in the Project area.

The community group, citizen or organization manages infrastructure that is one of several used by the community and not all are affected by the project.

The PPP might provide the same infrastructure run by the community group, citizen or organization, but it is not certain until the project is further refined in future phases.

The community group, citizen or organization manages infrastructure that is not really affected by the Project.

Are there potentially affected under-represented or vulnerable groups?

The Project will directly affect their daily lives (positively or negatively)

The Project will only partially affect their daily lives (positively or negatively)

The project might directly affect their daily lives, but it is not certain until the project is further refined in further phases.

It seems very unlikely the project will affect their daily lives.


Appendix 3 – Community Engagement Methods

1. DIRECT MEETINGS WITH SPECIFIC COMMUNITY GROUPS, CITIZENS OR ORGANIZATIONS

Direct meetings with specific community groups, citizens or organizations should focus on high priority groups, as identified in the Engagement Mapping. The CA needs to thoughtfully determine how many direct meetings they can realistically afford.

Direct meetings are highly effective, but they take time and effort on the part of the CA and the community. Some meetings can be large and have 500 or 1,000 people attend. These should be used strategically throughout the PPP Process. Bringing key community citizens, groups and organizations up to speed about the proposed PPP is important, and this is often most effectively done with direct meeting.

Specific invitations will be sent out to the target groups, and the size of the meeting will depend on how large that community group or sector is. The CAs will typically present information on the PPP that relates to the interests of the attendees.

During the initial phases of the PPP process, the CAs should utilize community groups/organizations that represent broad sectors in the community. As opposed to trying to meet with all the individual groups, citizens or organizations that might have an interest in a proposed PPP. It is more effective to meet with the community associations or entities that represent different community sectors and have that organization assist the CA with spreading information to their citizens.

Community Meetings are very good for:

• Engaging a specific community group, citizen or organization to discuss issues that are relevant to them.

• Discussing issues that are contentious, as the meetings are typically smaller, and conflict can be handled more effectively.

• Engaging groups that are under-represented, as the CA can structure the topics, time and locations of the meeting to make it more likely community citizens from this group will attend.

Challenges with using this engagement technique

• Strong facilitation of the meetings is needed by the CA as some groups have vocal individuals who may try to dominate the meeting.

• These meetings require dedicated funding and can be time-consuming to organize since the availability of the groups, citizens or organizations must be considered.

Ways in improve the usefulness of the Public Meetings include:

• Work directly with the individual community group you are meeting with the structure the meeting so that their citizens are more likely to attend.

• Use the community groups/associations that represent this group to send out notifications and invitations to the meeting.

• Take time to prepare for the meeting and focus the information the CA is presenting to match the interest of the community group you are meeting with.


• Have a clear purpose for the meeting. Be clear about the specific issue(s) the CA is looking for input on. Start the meeting by making sure the community citizens understand the meeting purpose.

• The CA chair of the meeting should be an effective facilitator, to ensure the meeting stays on topics, and the individual participants are all given equal opportunity to contribute to the discussion.

Phases of the PPP Process where this type of meeting is most useful:

Information and Materials for the Meetings:

• Present information that is specific to the community group you are meeting with. Presenting general information is less effective.

• Consider getting input on the information and materials the CA is going to present from the association that represents this group.

• associations will have a good idea of the issues and topics that their citizens want to hear about

2. GENERAL COMMUNITY MEETINGS

This is one of the most common forms of community engagement. The size of the meeting can range from a few dozen to over 100 community citizens. These meetings are an opportunity to talk directly with community citizens and find out what types of services and/or infrastructure they need. The meetings are typically held in community offices or a central community area.

General community meetings can take a variety of different forms, and the CAs should continuously collect feedback on the meetings from participants so they can adjust the format or structure as needed.

General Community Meetings are a great place to generate ideas for PPPs, build consensus, prioritize a variety of ideas, and help build interest and support for PPP ideas. The CAs should continue to use community meetings as part of the PPP process, because ideas identified by the community at the ground level are more likely to be successfully developed, as they will have broad community support.

General Community Meetings are very good for:

• Engaging many community citizens, groups and organizations

• Ensuring large number of community citizens receive the same information

• Identifying general ideas or outlining general issues in a short timeframe

• Getting consensus on next steps or necessary follow-up

• Identifying special interests

PPP PHASES

Identification Phase

Pre-Feasibility Phase

Feasibility Phase

Procurement Phase

Implementation Phase

LESS USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

MODERATELY USEFUL

LESS USEFUL


Challenges with General Community Meetings:

• It is difficult to know how representative the group of participants is, as some community citizens may not be interested or have time to attend.

• It can be challenging to get input from everyone. As described in research by Jules Pretty, the larger the group, the fewer people tend to speak.

Ways in improve the usefulness of General Community Meetings include:

• Advertise the meeting in advance. CAs should continue to use posters, banners and announcements on loudspeakers and radio as keyways to notify community citizens about upcoming meetings. CAs should consider advertising via Text Messaging, WhatsApp, Blogs and other electronic communications tools.

• Select a date when the key CA decision makers can attend with the local Councillor(s). It is important that key PPP proponents be present to provide information and lead the discussion.

• Consider having two sessions in the same day, so that people have a choice. The sessions will be the same, but with two options for when to attend, community citizens can pick what works best for them. Typically, this will be a meeting in the afternoon and a second in the evening. That way if people work during the day, they can attend in the evening or, if they work evenings they can attend in the afternoon.

• To encourage people to attend, the CA may consider offering meals, refreshments, door prizes or some type of entertainment. For certain sub-groups (i.e. elderly, disabled, poor), CAs may consider helping with transportation (i.e. bus fares, shuttle service), or have a place where kids can be kept occupied with crafts or games, while their caregivers attend the meeting.

• Select a location(s) that are familiar to community citizens

• The CAs should use their engagement list to identify community citizens who should receive direct notification/invitation to the meeting

• Notify under-represented groups about the meeting time and location. Provide support for people from these groups to attend. E.g. ensure the meeting location is accessible for people with disabilities, provide additional opportunities for women to participate if they traditionally do not attend, etc.

• Take time to prepare for the meeting, develop an agenda and materials to present. If a community meeting is poorly organized or run, it can discourage or create opposition to the PPP idea.

3–6 people Everyone speaks

7–10 peopleAlmost everyone speaks

• Quieter people speak less• One or two may not speak at all

11–18 people 5 or 6 people speak a lot, 3 or 4 join in occasionally

19–30 people 3 or 4 people dominate

30+ people Little participation in a discussion is possible

Source: Pretty., 1995. Pretty, Jules, 1995, Participatory Learning for Sustainable Agriculture in World Development, Vol.23, No.8


• The CA should plan for how they will display and collect information. Using large posters or pretensions can be helpful and having a variety of options for participants to provide input is helpful, such as note takers during discussions, feedback or suggestion forms that individuals can fill out, breaking into smaller group discussion for a part of the meeting is another option.

• Before the meeting starts make sure the community participants understand what the meeting is about, why they are there and how the information that will be discussed will be used by the CA. It is important to ensure community participants have a realistic expectation of what the meeting will achieve.

Phases of the PPP Process where General Community Meetings are most useful:


• This type of meetings is often used early in the PPP lifecycle and therefore information will not have a high level of detail.

• Use wording such as “Requesting your ideas about …” or “Asking for your general comments on …”.

• If using this during the Identification or Pre-Feasibility Phase, be careful about making definitive statements about the PPP, the CAs need to be careful about creating unrealistic expectations in the community.

• As with all types of engagement, use simple language and include visual materials, such as picture, photos, diagrams and spatial maps.

3. ONE-ON-ONE MEETINGS WITH KEY COMMUNITY GROUPS, CITIZENS OR ORGANIZATIONS

One-on-One meetings are an important engagement tool, as individual community citizens, groups and organizations appreciate the individual contact.

These meetings are usually focussed on specific issue(s) and will often occur in the residence of the affected community member. As mentioned below as a challenge, these meetings are time consuming, so use them only when the other forms of engagement do not allow the community to effectively share their information. If the community is sharing very personal information that is private in nature (i.e. financial or health), then one-on-one meetings are useful. In other situations, a one-on-one meeting with a very vocal opponent of the PPP may also be useful. It allows the CA to really listen to the individual and makes the individual feel like they have truly been heard. Once a very vocal opponent feels like the CA really understands their concerns, they will often become more collaborative and constructive with their input. It may also be worth meeting one-on-one with key influential people in the community to ensure they have accurate and complete information about the Project to share with the people who turn to them for advice.

One-on-One meetings are very good for:

• Building relationship and trust with individual community citizens.

• Resolving difficult or contentious issues

PPP PHASES



Feasibility Phase

Procurement Phase


MOST USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

MODERATELY USEFUL

MOST USEFUL


• Providing/listening to individuals with specific information that is private in nature.

• Providing accurate information to influential citizens of the community. Community citizens will often ask key elders, religious leaders or tribal leaders for their opinion on a PPP. Ensuring that the key individuals are forming their opinions based on accurate information is important.

Challenges with using this engagement Technique:

• It is time consuming to have a lot of one on one meetings, so will need to be used selectively

• Specific information needs to be presented and it can take time and effort to get that information

• It is not viewed as transparent by the community in general. People may wonder what specific agreements have been made behind closed doors. This can be mitigated by ensuring the Project information shared at one-on-one meetings is the same as information disclosed at general forums. When appropriate, the CA may also consider providing summary information or lists or of the Agreements that have been reached with Community citizens, groups and organizations.

Ways in improve the usefulness of One-on-One meetings include:

• Provide an outline of the topics or and agenda you will discuss in advance of the meeting, so that both parties have realistic expectations about the meeting and participants can prepare for the meeting in advance.

• Begin the meeting by making sure everyone has a similar understanding of the focus of the meeting, and how the information from the meeting will be collected and used by the CA.

• Provide some transparency to the general community by disclosing the topics that will be discussed at one-on-one meetings, even if the specific details are private. For example, if discussing compensation as part of re-settlement programs ensure that the formula for calculating compensation is publicly known and that the same valuation techniques are used for all community citizens who are being physically or economically resettled.



• Present information specific to the individual.

• For information related to compensation for relocation or resettlement, provide details of the valuation methods and ensure it is the same method used for all community citizens who are being affected.

4. A COMMUNITY TASK FORCE OR SPECIAL COMMITTEE

A Community Task Force or Special Committee is a selected group of community representatives who meet to discuss issues related to the PPP.

PPP PHASES



Feasibility Phase

Procurement Phase


MODERATELY USEFUL

MODERATELY USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

MOST USEFUL


These groups will usually have a Terms of Reference that defines the specific aspects of the PPP they are supposed to discuss and the outcome or output that the CA is looking the Committee to create.

These groups often involve a cross section of the community so that a variety of interests and perspectives are heard. The groups can have an internal member act as the chair and facilitator, or an external facilitator can be used. Many of the groups work on a consensus basis, where the group develops advice or suggestions that the different participants can all accept.

Community Task Force or Special Committee are very good for:

• Consider a specific set of issues or topics and providing a forum where different community perspectives are heard.

• Creating guidance or advice to the CA regarding a specific PPP issue(s), which the CA can use as part of their decision-making process.

• Creating a sense of empowerment within the community, as they produce advice or decisions that will be used by the CA.


• Meetings must often be scheduled well in advance and can be difficult to coordinate.

• Asking someone from the community to become part of a committee is asking them to make a significant commitment to the process. It takes time for each of the participants to attend the meetings, especially if there is information or documents that must be reviewed prior to the meetings. In addition to preparation time, participants may incur travel costs, or be asked to take time off work to attend meetings. The CAs may be asked to provide some sort of compensation for this.

• Selecting the right number of participants so that a variety of perspectives are represented.

• Keeping the Committee focused on the specific issue(s) they are supposed to discuss requires a strong leader or facilitator.

• The CA needs to be willing to utilize the results of the committee. If the CA ignores or does not use the advice generated by a consensus process, then the interest and credibility of the committee will be lost.

• Some in the community may resent the fact a few people have been chosen to represent the view of the larger community. This can be mitigated by making the Terms of Reference for the Committee, meeting minutes and key recommendations from the Committee publicly available or allowing the public to attend key meetings as “observers”. The Group may also wish include schedules for reporting back to the groups they represent in their Terms of Reference and provide a mechanism for the general public to provide input to these Committees.

Ways in improve the usefulness of Task Force or Special Committee include:

• Provide the Group with a third-party facilitator to help ensure all perspectives are heard and the Committee stays focused on the designated topics.

• Provide a clear Terms of Reference for the Committee, so they know exactly what they are being asked to discuss and provide their advice on.

• Provide the committee with a schedule of when the CA expects them to provide their advice.

• Carefully consider the composition of the Task Force or Special Committee, to ensure it is representative of the broader community.




• To ensure that all participants in the Committee have the same basic level of understanding of the issue(s) background information should be provided.

• There may be a need for the CA to respond to requests for information from the committee. As they discuss specific issues, they may feel that they need additional information about the topic and can request the CA to provide that information.

5. INFORMATION CENTERS, BOOTHS AND STALLS

The CA can present information on a PPP in public locations, where there is a lot of pedestrian traffic. The displays include Project information, spatial maps, illustrations, etc. As community citizens pass by the display they can collect information about the Project or depending on the Phase of the PPP, they can provide comments or opinions. Locations in Markets, bus stations and other central locations are good for this type of engagement.

This type of engagement can be combined with the CA and the National Governments efforts to raise the public’s awareness and understanding of PPPs.

Information Centers, Booths and Stalls are very good for:

• Providing general information about a PPPs and collecting views and opinions from large number of community citizens.

• It generates interest and discussion in the community about PPPs.

• Is a mechanism to share information PPP information broadly, CA will be able to reach community citizens who may not be involved in any of the other engagement processes.


• The CA will need to have people located at the displays to answer questions and collect opinions and views.

• These displays can generate large amounts of information, and careful thought must be given to the type of information you will collect and the format you will collect it in.

Ways in improve the usefulness of Information Centers, Booths and Stalls include:

• Make sure the CA citizens who are working at the displays understand PPPs. The displays are less useful if the person working at the display cannot effectively answer community member’s questions.

• Consider collecting views and input in simple survey format, avoid collecting written comments, as this will be challenging and time consuming to process and organize written feedback.

• Use the displays to inform community citizens about other upcoming engagement events.

PPP PHASES



Feasibility Phase

Procurement Phase


MODERATELY USEFUL

MODERATELY USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

MODERATELY USEFUL

MOST USEFUL


Phases of the PPP Process where this type of engagement is most useful:

Information and Materials for the Displays:

• High level details are most effective, given that you may only have a few minutes to explain the

• PPP to community citizens as they pass by.

• Illustrations, diagrams and pictures are more effective than written material.

• Have simple survey forms that people can fill out and leave at the display. Keep the survey simple and short.

6. CREATIVE ENGAGEMENT

The use of artistic forms or expression allow community citizens to be engaged in a different way.

This can be the use of plays, songs or dances created by the CA to explain what the PPP is and how it might affect community citizens. Acting out the interaction a community member might have with the PPP allows citizens to visualize and think about what effect the project could have on them.

It can also be used to generate interest about the PPP, by having the CA support contests where community citizens create artwork or songs about the PPP to win prizes.

Or community citizens can use their mobile phones to take photographs or audio recordings and put them together in a montage as part of a contest.

There are many variations to this form of engagement.

Creative Engagement is very good for:

• Making community citizens think about the PPP in a different way, which can help them identify ideas or concerns that they might not otherwise express.

• Generates interest and discussion in a broad cross sector of the public.

• Good are reaching a younger portion of the community and can be integrated with engagement with the school systems.


• Managing and using the input can be challenging. Community citizens who provide this input may want to see it shared with the public.

• Not everyone is comfortable providing input in these creative ways, and therefore it might not engagement all participants.

Ways in improve the usefulness of Creative Engagement include:

• Use a member of the CA team who is comfortable working in creative or artistic environments.

PPP PHASES



Feasibility Phase

Procurement Phase


MODERATELY USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

MODERATELY USEFUL

MOST USEFUL



Information and Materials for the engagement process:

• There may be a need to provide materials to individuals who want to engage in this way.

7. SPATIAL MAPPING OF RESOURCES AND USE AREAS

CAs may consider involving community citizens in participatory spatial mapping to spatially identify important places, assets, infrastructure and resources in specific areas. A completed spatial map will show where people are located, the infrastructure they rely on and the services they regularly access. Spatial mapping around PPPs can be very useful as it forces community citizens to visualize the service or infrastructure that the PPP will provide and how they might interact or use it.

The concept of a “spatial map” can be broadly interpreted. The CA may choose to use a GIS or Google Earth Platform, an artistic rendition of the Project area, simple schematics or three-dimensional models. Any format that allows participants to associate “place” with different kinds of “use” will work. Depending on the type of Project, the phase of Project, and the type of spatial mapping being done, CAs may consider different methods of recording information. For example, some CAs may wish to use a standardized set of symbols to represent different kinds of use on spatial maps, while others may find it more beneficial to allow participants to use their own creativity to represent use and travel patterns.

After this form or engagement, the CA should have a spatial map that illustrates how community citizens view their community and surrounding environment. Patterns of use and commonly used services or infrastructure will become apparent after the spatial map is created, and this can be used to inform decisions related to PPPs.

Spatial Mapping is very good for:

• Identifying all the resources, services and infrastructure the community uses. Asking community citizens to visualize walking through the community and describing their daily routines will generate information that may not be identified with other forms of engagement.

• Stimulating interest and discussion with a broad cross section of the public; especially some of the harder to reach groups such as children/youth, elderly, women, indigenous people, and other socio-economic or cultural groups within the community.


• It can generate ideas of identifying concerns that are not related to the PPP, and community citizens can become focused in discussions that do not assist the CA in making decisions regarding a PPP.

• The spatial maps are often created by community citizens drawing on paper and it can be time consuming to transfer that information into a geospatial database, if the CA is using one.

• Spatial mapping is most useful when it is done by a wide cross section in the community. Ideally spatial mapping is completed by different age groups, cultural groups, genders, and socio-economic groups. This can be time consuming.

PPP PHASES



Feasibility Phase

Procurement Phase


MOST USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

LESS USEFUL

MOST USEFUL


Ways in improve the usefulness of Spatial Mapping include:

• Make sure the community citizens are clear about the types of resources and use areas the spatial map should identify; you want to make sure everyone providing information to the spatial map has the same understanding of how it will be used.

• Provide basic tools, such as a base map with key landmarks already located on them, to help orient community citizens who may not be familiar with reading spatial maps.

• Use a variety of methods to populate the spatial map, such as people walking around the community with the spatial maps, as well as facilitated spatial mapping at specific meetings.

• The CA will need to think carefully about how many community citizens they involve and how much input they will receive. The CA will need to have enough time and resources to compile the information onto one spatial map.

• Ensure that the final product is shared with the community citizens who were involved in developing it as well as sharing with the larger community.

• Describe how the spatial mapping information will be used to inform decisions made about the PPP.


Information and Materials for the engagement process:

• Large scale spatial maps, that you can spread out on a table or attach to wall are useful for compiling the community’s input.

• Smaller spatial maps can also be provided, so that community citizens can take them and mark on them as they travel through the community on a typical day.

• Geospatial software of some type is helpful for collecting and using the data at various phase of the PPP process.

8. COMMUNICATION AND AWARENESS CAMPAIGNS

Keeping the community informed about the PPP activities is an on-going activity for the CA and the

PPP. The engagement techniques listed below can be utilized as part of many of the previous engagement techniques.

Reporting back to the community is very important, and a variety of ways should be used to ensure a wide spectrum of people are reached. These tools can also be used in the report on KPIs created for each PPP.

The number of ways that information can be shared with the community is large. A few of the more common ways include:

• Posters

• Loudspeakers

• Community Notice Boards or Billboards

PPP PHASES



Feasibility Phase

Procurement Phase


MOST USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

LESS USEFUL

MOST USEFUL


• Websites and Social Media

• Radio and Television

• Flyers

• Brochures

• Regularly updated mailing lists

• Newsletters

• Newspaper ads, inserts and articles

• Press releases

• Progress bulletins

• Videotapes

• Utility bill statement inserts

Communication and Awareness Campaigns are very good for:

• Sharing standardized Project information

• Reaching many community citizens, groups and organizations.

• Providing updates on PPP activities and KPIs


• It is difficult to determine how widely the information is being spread or how it is being perceived.

• It is a one-way form of communicating, it is information going out to the community.

Ways in improve the usefulness of Communication and Awareness Campaigns include:

• Using multiple ways of reaching out, so that a broader spectrum of the community is likely to be reached.

• Combine these efforts with other outreach programs that other groups and organizations are undertaking, to increase the reach and reduce costs.

• Provide the community with information on how to ask questions, provide input or raise concerns.

• Use local languages for communication

• Use visual (drawings) for main messages

• Use community champions/leaders/facilitators for outreach


PPP PHASES



Feasibility Phase

Procurement Phase


MOST USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

MOST USEFUL


9. SURVEYS

Surveys and questionnaires are used to find out the opinions and views of individual community groups, citizens or organizations. They involve a standard set of questions which are asked to a cross sections of the community. Surveys may be carried out in person, can be mailed out to individual households, businesses or organizations or by using electronic surveys via websites, cell phones or social media.

Surveys are very good for:

• Providing a representative sampling of the community, if done properly it will reflect the opinions of the whole community.

• Providing a good overview of community citizens views and opinions on specific topics.

• Providing both quantitative data and qualitative data to support information generated using other engagement techniques.

• Increase understanding about specific topics. For example, many CAs will want to undertake a “Willingness to Pay” survey during the Pre-Feasibility Phase of Projects that require user fees (tariffs, taxes, rents etc.) to fund a PPP. This type of survey is designed to generate information specifically for informing decisions related to funding models but can also help the community understand why these fees are collected and what they are used for.

• Perception surveys: Determining community satisfaction or dissatisfaction with an existing service. For example, during the implementation phase, CAs may want to regularly reach out to the community to see how existing services may be improved or if a PPP is meeting community expectations.


• To ensure the accuracy of the survey is high, they often must be conducted by qualified specialists, although some smaller surveys can be done by the CA directly.

• Once the survey questions have been set, there is no adjusting them during the interviews to reflect additional comments from community citizens.

• Used by themselves, they have limited value, but if used in combination with other engagement techniques described above it can provide additional confidence for the CA or PPP as they make key decisions.

• Carrying out large surveys and processing the data generated from them is both expensive and time consuming.

• It is difficult to predict how many people will respond to surveys if they are mailed, posted on websites or on social media. Low response rates may not only result in little data, the data received may be skewed, and only represent a select sub-group within the community. CAs that dedicate personnel responsible for completing the surveys with individual households, or by stationing them in public/high use areas (such as markets, bus terminals, or public parks) will likely get a higher response and improve the quality of the data.

Ways in improve the usefulness of Surveys include:

• Consider getting support from qualifies specialists to design and carry out surveys.

• Carefully consider the access in the community to communication tools such as cell phones or the internet.

• When conducting surveys in person, target high use areas where multiple and diverse sub-groups within the community are expected to gather.

• Define the survey sample size and type of information to be collected to use short and concise questions.

• Partner with the private sector and coordinate efforts



10. PUBLIC HEARINGS

Public hearings are a formalized process, usually associated with specific regulatory or policy requirements.

The environment in a Public Hearing can be very adversarial and therefore difficult to develop consensus or agreement. However, it is listed here as one form of Engagement, as the CAs may have to participate in them as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment review or other regulatory approval processes that the PPP will need to go through. Public Hearings are usually conducted by a government or quasi-government agency. The PPP will typically be viewed as the proponent and interveners will present information in opposition to, or in support of the PPP. Often, some of the interveners are citizens of the local community. Public Hearings will usually involve lawyers or legal counsel and therefore take on a more formal air.

Public Hearings are good for:

• Providing an opportunity for government bodies to hear different opinions before making a final decision on granting approval(s) for a PPP.

• Allowing technical information to be presented in a public process

• Providing the Community Citizens with a sense that the PPP is following all the laws and regulations in Tanzania.


• It is adversarial and can create bad feelings or animosity among community citizens.

• Community citizens can feel dis-empowered, as the process is not easy for them to participate in and the legal nature of it can be both frustrating and intimidating. Preparing for hearings (providing written submissions, oral arguments, reviewing technical Project information) can be both difficult and time consuming. Some community citizens may wish for technical or legal support, but this can be expensive and, in some case, unattainable for community citizens.

• It does not help develop community consensus, especially for controversial PPPs. It creates a “winner” and a “loser” which contributes to opposition to the project.

Ways in improve the usefulness of Public Hearings include:

• The CAs should work with the community citizens before a public hearing, so that as many issues or concerns as possible are addressed outside the Public Hearing process.

• Any information or comments presented by the CA should be very consistent with the information they have been sharing with the community throughout the PPP life cycle.

• CAs may offer participant funding so community citizens can get technical or legal support during a hearing process.

PPP PHASES



Feasibility Phase

Procurement Phase


MOST USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

MODERATELY USEFUL

MOST USEFUL



Public Hearing processes are scheduled according to the requirements of the applicable regulations or legislation in Tanzania. Typically, this will occur somewhere towards the end of the Feasibility phase and prior to the Procurement Phase.

Information and Materials for the Hearings:

Regulatory requirements will outline the information that needs to be developed. For example, the Environmental Impact Assessment will include a Terms of Reference with requirements for specific types of information, which the PPP will need to provide.


PPP PHASES



Feasibility Phase

Procurement Phase


LESS USEFUL

MODERATELY USEFUL

MOST USEFUL

LESS USEFUL

LESS USEFUL


Appendix 4 – Sample Community Complaints Management Mechanism

OVERVIEW

The objectives of a Complaints Management Mechanism is to:

• Establish a mechanism for responding to complaints in an understanding, transparent and culturally appropriate way.

• Develop an easy-access, no-cost and efficient complaint procedure for the local population involved and/or impacted by the Project.

• Implement effective dialogue and open lines of communication with the public.

• Help to prevent unrealistic expectations and/or negative perceptions from the local population towards the Project.

• Establish a system of investigation, response and quick complaint resolution.

• Reduce gradually the number of local populations’ complaints regarding the Project.

• Improve the Project social performance through the analysis of complaints.

A Complaints Management Mechanism is for all Community citizens, groups and organizations with an interest in the Project. Participation in the Community Ccomplaints Management Procedure is voluntarily and non-excluding. Any person with the right to participate in the procedure will have easy access to it and will be encouraged to use this confidential complaint system. Any participant in the procedure is also free to use the judiciary system when he/she considers it pertinent. The procedure does not replace the public mechanisms of complaint and conflict resolution but attempts to minimise use of them.

Responsibility for implementing a Complaints Management Mechanism needs to be clear. Being responsible for the implementation of the Community complaints management Procedure includes disclosure, reception, management and monitoring of complaints, feedback to local communities and persons with complaints, and coordination of complaints analysis. All these steps will assist when developing recommendations for continued improvement of Project processes related to community relations.

The following performance indicators should be used to assess the Complaints Management Mechanism:

• Participation: Percentage of complaints to the Project channeled through the Community complaints management Procedure. The target is to channel 90% of complaints through the Community complaints management Procedure, before complaints reach the media or the courts.

• Effectiveness: Percentage of complaints receiving effective and timely responses. The target is 100% within 21 days.

• Resolution: Percentage of complaints resolved at the satisfaction of the person with complaint. The target is to resolve at least 75% of complaints either through direct dealing of the Project with the person with complaint or through mediation with a third party.

• Recurrence reduction: Differentiate the number of complaints by categories – compensation plan, land negotiation process, environmental issues, accidental impacts (property and personal damage), and misinformation or lack of information and Project employee or contractor behavior. Target is to gradually reduce the number of complaints in each category year-on-year. The intention is to learn from complaints and respond to them qualitatively in a manner that, over time, reduces their rate of occurrence.


• Influence: This qualitative indicator identifies policy changes in the Project influenced by an assessment of complaints management procedure indicators and complaints analysis.

• Complaint/Issue Log will be established: The records will include the following information:

» Name of person with a complaint;

» How the complaint was received;

» Date the complaint was received and recorded;

» Location/village/clan;

» Contact information;

» Description of the complaint

» Follow-up corrective action steps;

» Corrective action taken by whom and date,

» Response and means of response (written or verbal).

A Complaint/Issue Log number and unique identifier for the incident will be given. Complaint information will be organized geographically and in a chronological order beginning with the events leading up to the incident (if any exists), followed with the details of the incident itself and will include post-incident events (if any exist).

The Complaint Log will include correction-action steps that will be developed through the process depending on the complexity of the complaint and its resolution.

To ensure analysis and development of corrective and improved actions the complaint and/or issue will be given to the appropriate department for resolution.


SAMPLE COMPLAINTS MANAGEMENT MECHANISM


SAMPLE COMPLAINTS MANAGEMENT FORM

Date: Location/Village:

Grievant Name: Action Officer from CA:

Contact Information: Unique ID#:

Issues Log #:

Type of Complaint:

The form must be completed for each complaint. All complaints will remain CONFIDENTIAL□ Individual □ Verbal

□ Group (more than one) □ Telephone

□ Community Organization □ Written/Electronic

Date of Action or Activity Causing Complaint:

Complaint (Description and grievant input):

Response/Follow up: Written and/or verbal follow-up will be given to affected groups, citizens or organizations

as soon as possible13 followed by a written response14 outlining any decisions or actions taken. If in the case that a

complaint is impacted by current operational activities, timelines may be extended to ensure that all information is

considered appropriately. If more time is required to implement appropriate actions, the CA Community Engage-

ment team will inform the affected groups, citizen or organization (grievant).

□ Verbal Response □ Written/Electronic Response

Date: Provide by:

Provide a summary response issued.

Completed Resolution:

Date: Action performed by:

Provide a summary of how the grievant responded to the proposed resolution and if there is further follow up

required, if the grievant is satisfied with the outcome or if a Grievance Appeal will be filed.

Grievant and/or CA Representative Signature Date

13 No more than 21 days.14 No more than 30 days.


SAMPLE COMPLAINTS MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE

PPP COMPLAINT MANAGEMENT PROCEDUREWHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT RAISING A COMPLAINT WITH THE PROJECT

The PPP Complaints Management Procedure is your way of raising a complaint with the Project. The Complaints Management Procedure is available to people living in the PPP area and others directly affected by the Project (including absentee landowners or those now living in urban centers).

The purpose of the Complaint Management Procedure is to provide you with a way to explain your complaints regarding Project activities.

The Project is providing information about the Complaints Management Procedure to those affected by Project activities. This handout provides a summary of the Complaints Management Procedure (shown in a diagram on the back of this page).

You will be notified about the Complaints Management procedure by CA staff, at community meetings, or in newsletters, brochures, and/or posters. Further information on the Complaints Management Procedure can be obtained at the Project CA Offices.

If you have any questions about the Complaints Management procedures, please ask your local CA person.

HOW TO MAKE A COMPLAINT

You can make a complaint in writing or explain your complaint verbally to CA staff. There are different ways you can do this.

• You can tell CA staff your complaint in person during their visits to communities. The CA person will write your complaint down on a Complaints Management Form and give you a copy of the form to keep.

• You can put your complaint in writing. You can give this written complaint to a CA person or take the complaint to the CA Office.

• CA staff will be in close contact with local authorities and will make themselves available to respond to any complaint brought up through community leaders.


WHAT HAPPENS TO YOUR COMPLAINT?

Your Complaint is Received

• All complaints are recorded on a Complaints Management Form by CA staff.

• A copy of all complaints written on the Complaints Management Form will be given to the person who made the complaint.

• The copy given to you provides you with a unique identification number for your complaint so you can ask CA for updates on your complaint

Your Complaint is Registered

• CA will keep a copy of your complaint and record information about the complaint so that they can decide how to respond.

• CA will check to see if your complaint is a new complaint or if it is one that has been raised by you or someone else already.

• If your complaint is already registered – we will tell you that we already have your complaint and provide you with the identification number. CA will not accept multiple complaints for the same issue in the same location; but will identify that you have raised the complaint.

Your Complaint is Assessed

• If the complaint is related to the government or another external entity instead of the Project, you will be informed that this is not a Project issue and we will help you to identify who you need to speak to about your complaint.

• All Project-related complaints will be assessed by CA to determine the Project department responsible for responding to the complaint.

Response to your Complaint Planned

• CA will pass your complaint to the appropriate Project department for action and resolution.

• The Project department that receives your complaint will review and investigate your complaint and will work with CA to respond to your complaint.

• CA are responsible for keeping you informed of progress on your complaint.

• CA will provide you with a written response outlining the resolution of your complaint


Appendix 5 – The Six Steps by Phase



It is ok to start simple The CA should develop a simple statement that outlines the purpose of the

community engagement. The purpose will become more detailed and specific later.

In this phase, a simple focus on high-level general discussions about PPP concepts,

that can inform the CAs decision about which PPPs to advance is normally sufficient.

Box A5.1 provides a sample purpose statement.


An initial list is required of citizens, groups or organizations

The CA should create an initial list of community citizens, groups and organizations. This can be a challenging task, as there are no PPP details to help focus the identification phase. Instead, the CA may choose to identify a few representative groups, organizations or community citizens, whom the CA thinks can provide general input about PPP concepts and identify high-level issues or concerns.

If funding is limited, the initial identification of community citizens, groups and organizations can be done by the CAs as a desk-top exercise, using published information and the knowledge of the CA staff. It is a good practice to go to the project area and spend time identifying potential citizens, groups and organizations.


Mapping community citizens, groups and organizations at the identification Phase is challenging as the PPP is often just a concept or general idea, potentially with multiple options being evaluated.

At least a high-level assessment of interest and influence should be attempted

If the CA has the resources, they may undertake a desktop exercise to group the community citizens, groups and organizations, based on their anticipated level of interest and influence. This exercise will probably not be an exhaustive process, but a high-level estimation to inform the initial engagement planning in the next phase.

Our department will strategically engage with a limited number of community citizens, groups and organizations, to collect input on the PPP concept, and report this feedback to the CA staff as they consider which PPPs to advance to the preparation phase. The engagement will also help educate the community about the PPP process in general.

The objectives of the Community Engagement are to:

• Collect general input on the PPP Concept; and

• Report community input to CA staff, to inform the assessment of which PPPs to support.

BOX A5.1 Example of a Simple Purpose Statement at Inception Phase


Vulnerable groups will need special attention

Careful consideration of vulnerable groups is important during this Step, as they often have limited influence on a project which may result in them being mapped as low or medium importance. The CA may need to be more involved engaging with vulnerable groups to ensure they are effectively engaged.


Community meetings may be the best engagement method at this stage

Different techniques and tools can be used by the CAs to engage community citizens, groups and organizations. In this phase the engagement will be general and focus on creating awareness of the PPP process and a few initial meetings with some key groups.

If the CA has enough resources, it will be a good practice, to hold exploratory community meetings. If funding is very tight the CA can join such activities with other engagement programs to leverage their resources.

Prior to picking engagement tools and techniques, the CA should have already completed the Mapping Assessment. Based on the assessment, the CA should know which level of engagement they are targeting for each groups, citizen or organization.


Recording should start for any comments or questions

The community will likely share comments or questions about a PPP concept. It is possible that community citizens may have general comments about the PPP process. It will be important for the CA to record all comments and concerns in an organized tracking table or program of some type. The CA will need to be prepared to develop a simple grievance management process, to handle any official complaints or grievances they might receive. It is possible that the CA will not receive official complaints at this phase, and a grievance mechanism may not be needed at this early stage.


Name

Types of groups, citizens or organizations

Relation to the Project Contact Information

Social Media They Use Issues and Comments

Akida Kitutu

Local resident Lives directly behind the project

24 Main Street Cell 250-22-333-444

None Dust and rubbish get blown into his yard from the current bus stop.

Janna Asafo

Bus users Transfers buses at this location for work

835 Komo RoadCell 250-22-333-444

Whatsapp Doesn’t feel safe at night when she is using the bus stop.

Joshua Malulu

Informal Vendor Sells plastic containers from handmade stall beside the bus stop

Stall 11 beside main entrance to bus stop No cellphone

None Is worried that she will be kicked out of the area. She is willing to get an official stall but doesn’t have much money to pay for it.

Edina Khamis

Shop owner Runs a machine repair shop across the street


Whatsapp The informal vendors and busses are blocking access to his repair shop and affecting his business.

Emanuel Lindi

Ward Councilor Represents the Ward at the LGA

109 Central Road Cell 255-22-333-444Office 22-442-456

WhatsappFacebook

Interested in improving traffic flow and making the location more welcoming for shoppers.

Kevin Afia

Mtaa Representative

Liaison between the Mtaa and the Ward Councilor

Unit 4, Lot 2, A Road Cell [email protected]

None He hears a lot of complaints about the current bus stop and wants to improve the site.

Diasy Furaha

Local Respected Elder

Has lived near project all life and is well known and respected in the Community

Unit 2, Lot 99, D Road Cell 250-22-333-444

Whatsapp She likes the idea of a more organized bus terminal and is willing to talk to the community about the need.

Jumanne Ijumaa

Imam for local Mosque

Mosque is 400 m from bus stop


Whatsapp Many of the people who attend the Mosque use the bus stop. Many of them have complained about the pollution and safety.

TABLE A5.1 Example of a Simple Issues Tracking Table



A communications log should be established

The issues tracking table will be recording the outcomes of community engagement activities. It will track the names of the community citizens, groups and organizations, and the comments they made or issues they raised. At this point, the CA will be mostly receiving comments and ideas, and will have less requirement to officially respond to concerns or grievances from the community.

The CA may also begin to monitor local media to track comments and opinions in local papers, radio, etc. about PPPs and the potential project. This information should be recorded in the issues tracking tables as well.

Building a good reporting system early in the process increases the effectiveness of community engagement. If funding is limited at the identification phase, reporting can be concise and short, aimed at internal sharing of information within the CA. This information can inform their decision on which PPPs to advance to the next phase.

If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen!!

Reporting may include a listing of:

• How the PPP ideas were identified;

• The service or infrastructure that the community needs;

• What feedback was received on the issue or challenge of using PPP to meet this need; and

• The key risks and challenges the CA will face if they move forward with the PPP.

PREPARATION PHASE


During this phase the CA should focus on clearly communicating social and economic aspects of the Project, especially to those in the community that will be affected (through rents, tariffs, user fees) by the PPP. The purpose of the community engagement should thus be revisited and elaborated to include objectives such as:

• Integrating community input, as the PPP concept becomes more clearly defined;

• Manage expectations, build trust; and

• Begin to align business goals and competencies with concerns and development priorities of communities

• Ideally, input from the community from this phase will:

• Be used in final design, as projects that reflect the community input are more sustainable,

• Influence strategies for generating project revenue and securing financing; how the project is paid for should be influenced by community input,

• Influence management plans and clearly describe potential risks, and

• Provide input for other PPP assessments, such as the ESIA or the assessment of strategic, commercial, financial and legal viability.

The statement of the purpose should be elaborated


The community engagement process will actively seek community input to further define the PPP concept (size, location, mode of service delivery, cost, etc.).

Community input may influence how Partnerships are structured and how the Project is financed. Inclusion of community input into the design and development of the project will help us ensure community buy-in to the Project and create an environment that enhances the sustainability and economic viability of the project.

Community engagement will also ensure that accurate information about the PPP is shared with the community to manage the expectations of the community about what the Project will achieve.

The goals of the community engagement are to:

• Strive to include all affected members and groups by taking into consideration the barriers community citizens, groups and organizations have to being engaged.

• Be realistic with the level of effort they can apply to the engagement program, as our department has very limited resources and capacity.

• Strive to be inclusive, practical and realistic with all community engagement efforts

• Consider accessibility, physical as well as being accessible for literacy and numeracy, and try to make engagement open to everyone.

The goals of the community engagement are to:

• Collect and consider information from the community in the design of the Project

• Provide information to the community related to both the service and the potential provider

• Collect information on the business case for the project, this will include discussions on the ability and willingness to pay

• Ensure the community has accurate information about the size and scope of the PPP so that expectations are realistic about the potential for the project.

• Identify risks early in the process

BOX A5.2 Example of a Simple Purpose Statement at Preparation Phase

The preparation phase is when the CA begins to spend more time meeting with and engaging the community. The majority of the community engagement effort at this phase is on the impacted communities. The list of groups and members should be refined and expanded based on feedback from the earlier engagement process.

It will be beneficial to ensure a broad range of community perspectives are informing the design of the PPP. The CA should consider including groups that may have opposing views, or potential to block a project as well.

To help build local support, the CA can consider including groups or organizations related to local businesses and employment, for example: local trade unions and business development groups, local working training centers and local businesses that could provide cost effective services during construction or operation of the PPP. In addition to finding opportunities for local partnerships and maximizing local


Engagement should expand during project preparation

Engagement can extend to the local business community and labor representatives



The mapping will need to be revisited

And inform decision on how to engage and how intensively

Vulnerable groups again need extra attention


CAs should explore a much broader range of engagement methods

benefits, engagement with local private sector companies can help address the lack of trust that generally exists between the public and private sector. A constructive relationship between private sector and public sector in the community is needed for the PPP to be successful.

The mapping assessment should be reviewed and adjusted as necessary.

The CA will need to consider both the level of interest and the level of influence citizens, groups and organizations in the community could have on a PPP, to determine the appropriate way to engage with them. The revised mapping assessment will help identify the level of engagement effort that is appropriate to apply to each community citizen, group or organization and if it has changed now that the project is in the preparation phase.

Again, the intention is not to exclude groups or citizens who are mapped as having “lower” influence or interest, but to determine the appropriate level of engagement given limited resources. CAs may find that some groups who were very interested during the early phases, are less interested as they become more familiar and comfortable with the Project. The community engagement efforts in the previous phases can create benefits in this phase.

Careful consideration of vulnerable groups is again important during this Step. Extra effort will probably be needed to ensure that vulnerable groups are effectively engaged.

As the CA undertakes more community engagement activities, the number of engagement techniques and tools they use will likely increase. Examples of ones that might be used during the preparation phase include:

• One-on-one meetings;

• Community focus group / task force or special committee;

• Surveys to generate information about specific topics;

• Direct meetings with specific community groups;

• General Community Meetings;

• Information centres, booths, etc.;

• Communication and awareness campaigns;

• Media releases; and

• Community champions/leaders to communicate with the impacted communities

One type of engagement tool that the CAs should consider during the preparation phase are workshops aimed at local companies. During the next phase (procurement) the PPP will need to select the companies that provide the best VfM, and it will be beneficial if they were also community-based businesses as this

Workshops should be considered for local businesses


will maximize local benefits. In order to give the local business, the best possible chance to win contracts, the CA should hold procurement specific workshops with community-based businesses. At the workshops, they should provide information on the type of contracts they will need, the qualifications they will need and even consider offering training on how to prepare a competitive proposal.

The community will begin to share more comments or questions about a PPP during this phase. The CA will need to ensure a simple but effective procedure for recording and responding to issues, concerns and received from the community. Good engagement practices require that the feedback be acknowledged in some way.

An issue tracking table that will help manage issues, concerns and complaints is required. The list of community members engaged under Step 2 provides the basis for the issues tracking table. The issue tracking table will tend to become more sophisticated as project preparation proceeds. Even more refined engagement tracking systems may be needed later, but in order to help control the cost of engagement, a simple spreadsheet can be used initially.

As project preparation proceeds beyond the conduct of pre-feasibility studies, the CA should build on earlier processes to create a more fulsome issues tracking and complaints management process that can carried through to follow-on phases.

It will be important to record and respond to all community complaints in a timely fashion. The process for community citizens, groups and organizations to provide input or submit a complaint should be simple and widely accessible. All the complaints should be kept confidential and the objective is to identify potential problems early and address them whenever possible.

The complaints management procedure does not replace the public mechanisms of complaint and conflict resolution but attempts to minimize use of them. Community citizens, groups and organizations who do not feel their issue or complaint was appropriately addressed, can always use the judiciary system to try and resolve their issue.

The CA will need to continue keeping track of community engagement activities. The reporting at this phase should highlight how the input from the community engagement process has influenced the design or assessment of the PPP.

Internal reporting should include issues tracking tables, meeting minutes, and copies of the information used in any public awareness notices or postings on-line. If funding is available, community meetings and consultations should be supported by a person that can record the feedback shared by participants. Recording should include the date, location, list of participants, questions being asked, the response provided and any follow-up that might be required.

Regular reporting should become routine. There may be a need to prepare two types of reports; one that is used internally and one that is disclosed publicly.


Issues tracking tables should be put in place

Timeliness in responses will be important


Reporting needs to scale-up and made routine


TABLE A5.2 Example of a Refined Issues Tracking Table

Name

Name of Group/ Organi-zation Address Phone

Social Media/ Email

Method of Con-tact

Summary of Comment/ Discussion

Answer/Response Provided by LGA (if any)

Fol-low up Required (Yes/No)

Who will follow up?

Time-line for Follow- up Status

Anael Mesiya

Local Resident

24 Main Street

250-22-333-448

Whatsap Open House _ Feb 19

Dust and rubbish get blown into his yard from the current bus stop.

LGA is considering dust control measures in the new bus station, such as paving the lot. Rubbish collection is a concern to the LGA and they want to do a better job of controlling rubbish.

NA NA NA Com-plete

Gandolf Khamis

Ward Coun-cilor, East Side Ward

109 Central Road

255-22-333-444

22-442-456

None Open House – Feb 19

Interested in improving traffic flow and making the location more wel-coming for shoppers

NA NA NA NA Com-plete

Gandolf Khamis

Ward Coun-cilor, East Side Ward

109 Central Road

255-22-333-444

22-442-456

None Focus Group – Apr 13

Attended the first Meeting of the Focus Group. Agreed to the goals and objec-tives devel-oped for the Group

NA NA NA NA Com-plete

Joseph Mboa

Owner of Mboa Con-struction Ltd.

242 Gov Street

250-22-398-089

Websitewww.mboa.com

Open house Feb 19

He would like to do construction work on the project. He has several bulldozers and other equipment

The LGA will offer workshops to local companies to help pre-pare them to bid on contracts

Yes, invite Mr. Mboa to work-shop

Project leader

Two months

Com-plete

Joseph Mboa

Owner of Mboa Con-struction Ltd.

242 Gov Street

250-22-398-089

Websitewww.mboa.com

Focus Group – May 18

He thought the work-shop was very helpful, and he would like to attend the next one as well

Local com-panies are welcome to attend all the local workshops

Yes Project leader

On- going

On- going


The CA should also have identified key indicators that they will monitor as the project progresses through procurement and into operation. These indicators should be developed in consultation with the community and focus on the outcomes that the community and CA want to see from the PPP.

Box A5.3 provides a sample of some of the topics that could be covered in reporting.

The goals of engagement may be expanded during this phase, such as to include:

• Ensuring openness and transparency around bidding for the private partner by sharing information with the community on the procurement process;

• Maintaining support for the PPP by continuing to build trust and managing expectations;

• Ensuring a community engagement plan for the private partner is prepared with the community. Obligations for implementing this will need to be set out in the PPP agreement; and

• Maximize local benefit and local economic opportunities where they deliver VfM.

KPIs should be established with communities

Transparency, trust, and VfM continue as key considerations

PROCUREMENT PHASE


Summary of community engagement activities:

• What community groups were targeted?

• How many were engaged?

• How did we let the community know about the engagement (key notifications, meeting dates, Actions)?

• What input was the CA trying to collect from the community?

• What types of engagement tools were used?

Reporting against performance indicators

• Summary of feedback from the community:

• What feedback did we receive on the issue or challenge that PPP will address?

• What feedback did we received on the PPP options to solve this issue or challenge?

• What were the key concerns or risks identified?

• What were the key opportunities identified?

Next Steps:

• Upcoming community engagement events.

• Timeline for completing the preparation phase or intermediate steps.

BOX A5.3 Topics to Report On


The CA will need to review and as necessary adjust the list of community citizens, groups and organizations engaged. By the procurement phase, the list of those engaged should thus cover the community near the project, the primary users of the PPP and those who may be bidding on work.

The list may for example include more representatives of those communities brought into the PPP via procurement, such as the private sector and labor representatives. It may have been difficult to ensure the active engagement of such members prior to the PPP becoming ‘real’.

Community-based businesses and workers should have been identified in previous phases of the PPP engagement process and so the CA will already have shared information with them on the types of services that are required and the qualifications that their company will need to have to bid on the work. Previous engagement will have been more about informing, but the engagement during the procurement phase will also involve encouraging and supporting local businesses and workers to pursue contracts and work opportunities

The CA will review and adjust the mapping assessment as the PPP Project progresses. Now that the project has a specific location with key environmental and social approvals secured, the importance of the community living close to the project, and who use the project typically increase in interest and influence. Business and labor representatives may move to a higher tier in the mapping.

The CA’s can release updates on the PPP schedules, important dates or project milestones must be prominent. It is important to avoid surprises or an absence of information that can create unrealistic expectations or fuel misplaced rumors.

Engagement methods considered previously remain relevant. Methods that may be especially useful in the procurement phase include:

• Newspaper and radio advertisements. These are useful in making opportunities widely known. They should be used in both advertising the opportunity and for informing the public when a successful contract has been awarded;

• Project websites. Websites should include detailed project information, pre-qualification requirements (industry standards; insurance, certification and bonding requirements), instructions for preparing bids, important deadlines and how the CA will be accepting bids and contact information for individuals that can provide support or answer questions.

Engagement materials should continue to use simple language, diagrams, spatial maps, pictures, etc. to clearly describe the project design. The information should be in local languages and easy to understand, such as the use of diagrams and images as opposed to only written information.

Those who may bid for or undertake work need to be engaged

The mapping will should be revisited again

Advertisements and project websites are good ways of connecting to the community





The issues tracking table should continue to be used to list the issues and concerns raised by the community as well as a record of how the Project responded to them.

A community complaints management procedure should be fully operational. Any complaints from the preparation phase should have been responded to. The procedure should respond to complaint made to the project, including complaints against the process followed to select PPP Partners, its contractors and subcontractors as quickly and efficiently as possible. This will help avoid escalation of complaints and reduce any build-up of negative attitude towards the project.

The approach to responding to complaints that is proposed requires time and resources on the part of the CA and is intended to only apply to complaints against the PPP.

The CA will need to report on their engagement activities during the procurement phase, as they have been doing through all previous phases of the project cycle. It will be useful to release periodic updates for the community showing progress. Reporting on this information should be internal as well as external with the community. Outreach tools such as monthly newsletters, texts, posters, and blogs can be effective ways of keeping the community up to date.

The goals of engagement during the operations phase may include:

• Maintaining the community’s support built through community engagement in previous phases;

• Demonstrating follow-through on project commitments;

• Adjusting the operation or management of the PPP to reflect changing needs of the community;

• Supporting adjustments that may be required to the PPP (e.g., updates of services, user fees etc.) for it to reach its goals.

The list of community citizens, groups and organizations that the PPP will engage with during the life of the project operations will vary. Some PPP Projects can operate for decades, and community groups will come and go during that time. The PPP will need to actively track changes in the community and update their list of citizens, groups and organizations.

The PPP will need to continue to engage local businesses and labor, as the Project will need a variety of maintenance and service support over its life. Although the selection of suppliers for the PPP will be based on VfM, if local companies or labor is competitive and are employed by the PPP, local benefits and community acceptance of the project will be enhanced.

The complaints management procedure should be ready

Reporting should continue through the procurement phase

Goals of engagement will continue to evolve





The list of those engaged will vary over implementation



Given the long time frame of the implementation phase, the PPP should periodically review the mapping of community citizens, groups and organizations. Interest and influence may vary over time and the mapping assessment needs to be kept up-to-date. Keeping the listing and mapping assessment up-to-date is a very important step to ensure the Project identifies and addresses community issues early.

Using engagement methods that meet the communities need for information and involvement over the life of a project is a challenge. The CA and private partner will need to evaluate the effectiveness of each tool and adjust as needed.

Methods that can be particularly helpful in identifying emerging issues is the community task force or special committee. These groups are similar to community focus groups used in previous phases but be more structured and formalized. Such groups can be kept active as a precautionary measure, even if there are no specific issues to discuss.

The community complaints management procedure should be fully operational throughout the implementation phase. While best run by the private partner as the operator, the CA should also have a role to ensure it is run well.

The grievance process and issues tracking table will remain useful ways of monitoring how the PPP has responded to potential issues or conflicts before they become a major risk to the project. The objective of the complaint management and issues tracking procedures is to receive, respond and address any complaint made to the project—including complaints against the partners, contractors and subcontractor—as quickly and efficiently as possible. It should also inform operations plans and be considered when adjustments to management programs are made. The PPP will need to ensure the community is aware of how to file a complaint and the process should be simple and with minimal cost to the person filing the complaint.

Reporting back to the community remains key to ensuring the community is informed. The KPIs should be used to report back to the community and will demonstrated follow-through on commitments made in the previous phases. The PPP may consider preparing annual reports or summary documents that can be posted to web sites or made available to citizens upon request to the private partner or CA.

The community engagement mapping needs to be kept up-to-date

A community task force or special committee may help identify emerging issues

Operation of the complaint’s management procedure should continue




Tracking KPIs remains important



ReferencesAsian Development Bank. 2012. Strengthening Participation for Development Results - An Asian Development Bank Guide to

Participation. Mandaluyong City, Philippines: Asian Development Bank, 2012.

African Development Bank. 2001. Handbook on Stakeholder Consultation and Participation in African Development Bank Operations. Environment and Sustainable Development Unit (OESU). African Development Bank Publication 2001.

Calabrese. 2008. Strategic Communication for Privatization, Public-Private Partnerships, and Private Participation in Infrastructure Projects. World Bank Working Paper, No. 139. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank. Washington DC

CIVITAS Initiative. 2011. Reaching the Citizen: Toolkit on Effective Communications and Marketing. VANGUARD/CIVITAS handbooks, June (http://civitas.eu/tool-inventory/citizen-engagement-shelf)

European Commission. 2015. European Commission Stakeholder Engagement Consultation Guidelines. Brussels

Government of Tanzania. 2018. Tanzanian Community Engagement Framework. President’s Office-Regional Government and Local Administration. Dodoma

International Finance Corporation. 2007a. Good Practice Handbook for Companies Doing Business in Emerging Markets. Washington, DC

Inter-American Development Bank. 2017. Lessons from Four Decades of Infrastructure Project-Related Conflicts in Latin America and the Caribbean

International Finance Corporation . 2007b. Stakeholder Engagement Handbook. Washington, DC.

International Finance Corporation. 2012. Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability. Washington, DC. Bank Group. http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/115482804a0255db96fbffd1a5d13d27/Performance Standard_English_2012_Full-Document.PDF?MOD=AJPERES

Kottak, C.P,. 1991. Cultural Anthropology. McGraw- Hill, 2991, the University of Michigan.

Menocal, A. R,. and B. Sharma. 2008. Joint Evaluation of Citizens’ Voice and Accountability: Synthesis Report. London: DFID. https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/3425.PDF

World Bank. 2014 Strategic Framework for Mainstreaming Citizen Engagement in World Bank Group Operations. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank. Washington, DC

World Bank. 2016. Environmental and Social Framework. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank. Washington, DC (http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/383011492423734099/pdf/114278-WP-REVISED-PUBLIC-Environmental-and-Social-Framework.pdf#page=105&zoom=80(

World Bank. 2017. World Bank Group Public-Private Partnerships Reference Guide Version 3. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank. Washington, DC

World Bank. 2018. Template for ESS10: Stakeholder Engagement and Information Disclosure Stakeholder Engagement Plan and Stakeholder Engagement Framework. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank. Washington, DC (http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/909361530209278896/ESF-Template-ESS10-SEP-June-2018.pdf)

World Bank Group. 2016. Open Government Impact and Outcomes: Mapping the Landscape of Ongoing Research. Washington, DC: World Bank (http://opengovimpact.org/img/og-impact-full-report.PDF)

World Bank Group. 2018. Engaging Citizens for Better Development Results. An Independent Evaluation. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank. Washington, DC

IFC 2121 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20433 U.S.A.

ifc.org

Date post:	05-Aug-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

A Guide to Community Engagement for Public-Private ......the community affected by a PPP. The guide...

Documents